Doncaster Metropolitan Council Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re- appraisal

ISSUE

Issue | 9 May 2017

This report takes into account the particular instructions and requirements of our client. It is not intended for and should not be relied upon by any third party and no responsibility is undertaken to any third party.

Job number 245498-00245498-00

Ove Arup & Partners Ltd Admiral House Rose Wharf 78 East Street LS9 8EE www.arup.com Doncaster Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Contents

Page

1 Introduction 1 1.1 Overview 1 1.2 Background 2 1.3 Summary of the Method to Assessing the Green Belt in Doncaster 3 1.4 Relationship with Local Plan-making 4 1.5 Structure of this Report 4

2 Policy Guidance and Context 5 2.1 Overview 5 2.2 National Planning Context 5 2.3 Local Planning Context 9

3 Approach to Green Belt Site Re-appraisal 15 3.1 Overview 15 3.2 Starting Point for Assessment 15 3.3 Proposed Methodology for Assessment 15 3.4 Assumptions 21

4 Summarising the Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal 23 4.1 Overview 23 4.2 Grading 23

5 Conclusion 25 5.1 Overview 25 5.2 Summary of Assessment Outcomes 25 5.3 Aligning Outputs from the Stage 3 Re-appraisal with Progression of Sites through the Local Plan 27 5.4 Next Steps 27

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

1 Introduction

1.1 Overview Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council are currently preparing a Local Plan which will replace the adopted Unitary Development Plan and Local Development Framework (adopted Core Strategy). Since September 2015, Ove Arup and Partners (‘Arup’) has been appointed by Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council (‘Doncaster MBC’) to prepare a series of documents that review the South Green Belt around the Local Authority Area of Doncaster. This report represents Stage 3 of the overall work, and is a more detailed appraisal of sites which have emerged through the process so far, which includes a Stage 1 Green Belt Review: Methodology and Proformas (produced by Arup), and a Stage 2 Technical Sites Assessment (produced by Doncaster MBC). The aim of this Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal is to assess the implications of potentially removing any of the 55 identified individual sites from the Green Belt, and to judge the sites against the “Local Interpretation” of the five purposes of the Green Belt. Doncaster MBC anticipates, having regard to the development requirement and growth distribution strategy, that only a relatively small number of the total 55 sites may be required for release from the Green Belt. In doing so, the Council needs to understand the relative merits of the different sites, in terms of their role within the Green Belt; and then factor this intelligence alongside other site selection considerations including: Sustainability Appraisal findings, viability appraisals, and flood risk sequential testing, to inform overall decision-making about site selection choices in the emerging local plan. This Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal work will follow the methodology set out below: • Reflect on the changes in evidence base since the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, and understand the implications for the re-appraisal of 55 potential Green Belt sites; • Where necessary, recalibrate1 the Stage 1 Green Belt Review’s “General Areas” to understand the specific Green Belt implications of releasing any of the 55 potential Green Belt sites. This involves looking again at each of the sites against the five Green Belt purposes. It is advised therefore that the Stage 3 work is read in conjunction with the Stage 1 Green Belt Review. • Review the Resultant Boundary created if one of the 55 proposed Green Belt sites is removed from the “General Area”.

1 “Recalibrate” and “re-define” in this sense does not change the outcomes of the Stage 1 Green Belt Review. However, given the change in scale of sites for assessment, these terms define a method to ‘check, adjust or standardise’ against the accepted model of the Stage 1 Green Belt Review.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 1 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

1.2 Background

Stage 1 Green Belt Review The Stage 1 Green Belt Review analysed 64 General Areas of Green Belt against the local interpretation of five Green Belt purposes. The assessment concluded: • That almost all Green Belt areas performed strongly or very strongly on at least one of the Purpose Sub-Criteria. • General Areas adjacent to the built form of the ‘Large Built up Area of Doncaster’ had a stronger role in ‘checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas’, however, there were a large number of areas that connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt which performed a strategic role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of conurbations. • Few General Areas were considered to play an essential role in preserving a land gap between settlements. However, a relatively large number of General Areas were considered to support a ‘wide, but largely essential’ strategic gap within the South Yorkshire Green Belt. Areas to the north and south of the Borough, which were predominantly more rural, were considered to have a weaker role in preserving a land gap between settlements. • There was a relatively even split of General Areas which resisted ribbon development, those which permitted ribbon development in part, and those General Areas which were not considered to have had a role in restricting ribbon development. Only two areas were considered to have permitted unrestricted ribbon development. • The majority of General Areas were considered to display moderate levels of sensitivity to encroachment or higher, which reflects the open, rural and largely undeveloped nature of Green Belt away from the main settlements within Doncaster. Similarly, the majority of General Areas were considered to display a moderately strong, strong, or strong unspoilt rural character. • There are a number of General Areas which are adjacent to the Historic Core of a Historic , however relatively few General Areas supported key views into and out of a Historic Town. • Only one General Area is considered to fall within a Regeneration Priority Area, however, there are 20 General Areas which are considered to be ‘contiguous’ with a defined Regeneration Priority Area.

Doncaster MBC-led Stage 2 Assessment Since the production of the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, Doncaster MBC has consulted on a range of other evidence based documents, and has used those documents to help clarify potential Green Belt sites for re-appraisal. These documents include: the Site Selection Methodology and Housing/ Employment Needs Assessments (2015), Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (HELAA) (2015/6), Doncaster Local Plan Homes and

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 2 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Settlements paper ( 2016), and Sustainability Appraisal (SA) of Doncaster’s Growth Options (March 2016). Against this background of evidence and further work, Doncaster MBC has identified 55 potential Green Belt sites which have been shown to be deliverable / developable through the HELAA; and which Doncaster MBC consider to be capable of contributing to the Local Plan and SA objectives. Although the Local Plan process is considering far more Green Belt site representations than just the 55 sites identified by the Council, Doncaster MBC has chosen to omit other Green Belt site options. Doncaster MBC has confirmed that this is due to them being located at (or near) settlements where sufficient sites have already been identified that far exceed the growth and distribution requirements set out in the Homes & Settlements consultation (March 2016). As such, the Council has considered that an exceptional circumstances case could not be made for new development plan allocations on the other Green Belt sites, when other non-Green Belt sites have already been identified. Should any further sites be put forward which could be considered as being reasonable options capable of contributing towards the identified strategy; or sites omitted previously from the study potentially become required, these will be assessed in line with the methodology and included as a subsequent Addendum to this report if necessary. With regards to employment, there is a reduced pool of potential employment allocations compared to residential. Doncaster MBC therefore considered that they have some scope as allocations and therefore all representations were looked at.

1.3 Summary of the Method to Assessing the Green Belt in Doncaster As set out, the overall review of Green Belt in Doncaster has been iterative, and has been undertaken in three stages. Specifically, this report focuses on Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal. To highlight the iterative nature of the work, Figure 1 provides a summary of the process carried out so far, which comprises: • Stage 1 Green Belt Review: This was completed in 2015 and 2016, and supports the objective assessment of General Areas of Green Belt against a Local Interpretation of the Five Purposes of the Green Belt. • Stage 2 Technical Site Constraints Assessment: Following the assessment of General Areas of Green Belt within Doncaster, the technical site constraints assessment work has been undertaken by Doncaster MBC. • Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal: Areas that have evolved through the Stage 1 and 2 assessments will be re-appraised against the “Local Interpretation” of the five Green Belt purposes. The ‘Resultant Green Belt boundary’ will be appraised to determine its likely strength. This Stage will need to be supported by a specific demonstration of “exceptional circumstances”. Re-appraisal is necessary to capture the different scales of assessment.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 3 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Figure 1 Conceptual diagram for progressing from the Stage 1 General Area assessment to Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal

1.4 Relationship with Local Plan-making Importantly, this Stage 3 report does not set out whether sites should be released from the Green Belt. This will remain a decision for Doncaster MBC. The final decision on whether to select sites to be released from the Green Belt will be reached via a combination of factors, which will emerge as the Council progresses the Local Plan to Publication Draft in autumn 20172. Doncaster MBC will also reflect on matters such as: • Acuteness and intensity of housing need; • Constraints on the supply and availability of other land; • The nature and extent of harm to the Green Belt; and, • The balance between realising sustainable development without impinging on the Green Belt – in order to support any definition of “exceptional circumstances”3.

1.5 Structure of this Report The proposed structure of this report is set out as follows: • Section 2 sets out any changes to the national planning guidance on undertaking Green Belt reviews; • Section 3 reviews the approach to Green Belt Site Re-Appraisal, including establishing the ‘starting point’ for assessment, the proposed methodology, scenarios for different outputs and key assumptions; and, • Section 4 and 5 summarises the outcomes of assessing 55 Potential Green Belt Site Re-appraisals.

2 Doncaster Local Plan (December 2016) Local Development Scheme 3 Set out within recent case law and expanded upon further in Chapter 2: Calverton Parish Council v Council, Broxtowe Borough Council and Gedling Borough Council

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 4 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

2 Policy Guidance and Context

2.1 Overview The national context is defined by the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) and the Planning Practice Guidance (PPG), case law, and relevant Ministerial Statements.

2.2 National Planning Context The planning policy context for Green Belt is set out within the NPPF and PPG. This context remains largely unchanged since the Stage 1 Green Belt assessment.

National Planning Policy Framework The NPPF (2012) is founded on the ‘presumption in favour of sustainable development’, which for plan-making means that Local Planning Authorities should positively seek opportunities to meet objectively assessed needs, unless specific policies in the NPPF indicate that development should be restricted. Protection of Green Belt around urban areas is a core planning principle of the NPPF; policies setting out the role of Green Belt land and protecting its function are set out in the Chapter 9 of the NPPF. These policies set out the following concepts and requirements: • The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy as being to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open (Paragraph 79); • The Five Purposes of the Green Belt (Paragraph 80); • The responsibility on Local Authorities with Green Belts in their area to establish boundaries in their Local Plans, and once established, alter Green Belt only in exceptional circumstances, or through the review of the Local Plan (Paragraph 83); • Promoting sustainable patterns of development when reviewing Green Belt, by directing development towards urban areas inside the Green Belt boundary towards and inset within the Green Belt’ (Paragraph 84). Specifically, in relation to defining boundaries for Green Belt, Local Planning Authorities should: • ‘Ensure consistency with the Local Plan strategy for meeting identified requirements for sustainable development; • Not include land which it is unnecessary to keep permanently open; • Where necessary identify in their plans areas of “safeguarded land” between the and the Green Belt, in order to meet longer term development needs stretching well beyond the plan period; • Make clear that the safeguarded land is not allocated for development at the present time. Planning permission for the permanent development of

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 5 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

safeguarded land should only be granted following a Local Plan review which proposes the development; • Satisfy themselves that Green Belt boundaries will not need to be altered at the end of the development plan period; and • Define boundaries clearly, using physical features that are readily recognisable and likely to be permanent.’ (Paragraph 85)

National Planning Practice Guidance The PPG is intended to provide up-to-date, accessible and useful guidance on the requirements of the planning system. The PPG was updated in October 2014, reiterating the importance of the Green Belt and acknowledging that Green Belt may restrain the ability to meet housing need. The following paragraphs are relevant to Green Belt Assessment: Paragraph 044 Do housing and economic needs override constraints on the use of land, such as Green Belt? – ‘The NPPF should be read as a whole: need alone is not the only factor to be considered when drawing up a Local Plan. The Framework is clear that local planning authorities should, through their Local Plans, meet objectively assessed needs unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against the policies in the Framework as a whole, or specific policies in the Framework indicate that development should be restricted’ (as it is with land designated as Green Belt). ‘The Framework makes clear that, once established, Green Belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, through the preparation or review of the Local Plan.’ Paragraph 045 Do local planning authorities have to meet in full housing needs identified in needs assessments? - ‘Assessing need is just the first stage in developing a local plan. Once need has been assessed, the should prepare a Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment to establish realistic assumptions about the availability, suitability and the likely economic viability of land to meet the identified need for housing over the plan period, and in so doing take account of any constraints such as Green Belt, which indicate that development should be restricted and which may restrain the ability of an authority to meet its need.’

Government Initiatives The Stage 1 Green Belt Review largely covers national perspectives on Green Belt assessment and the role of Green Belt. However, since the production of the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, the Government have released the Housing White Paper4. Within this, the Government states that it will ‘maintain existing strong protections for the Green Belt and clarify that Green Belt boundaries should only be amended in exceptional circumstances, when Local Authorities can demonstrate that they have fully examined all other reasonable options for

4 DCLG (2017) Fixing Our Broken Housing Market – Housing White Paper

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 6 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

meeting their identified housing requirements’. These reasonable options comprise: • Making effective use of suitable Brownfield site and the opportunities offered by estate regeneration; • The potential offered by land which is currently underused, including surplus public sector land where appropriate; • Optimising the proposed density of development; and • Exploring where other authorities can help to meet some of the identified development requirement. In addition, the White Paper sets out that ‘where land is removed from the Green Belt, local policies should require the impact to be offset by compensatory improvements to the environmental quality of accessibility of the remaining Green Belt land’. The Planning Advisory Service (PAS) published updated guidance for undertaking a review of the Green Belt in February 2015. This guidance will still remain relevant for the Stage 3 Green Belt Re-appraisal. Summary: There has been no change in national policy since the Stage 1 Review. However, given the change in scale of sites, it is necessary to recalibrate the Stage 1 assessment to re-appraise land against the five national purposes of the Green Belt (Paragraph 80), use physical features and readily recognisable boundaries to define a Green Belt boundary and to demonstrate exceptional circumstances prior to any Green Belt release. Whilst the Housing White Paper does represent a change for the future of Green Belt, the impact on the re-appraisal is limited. Indeed, it could be argued that the Housing White Paper adds additional clarity to the ‘tests’ required to demonstrate exceptional circumstances. If the proposals in the Housing White Paper are implemented it will mean the outputs from the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re- appraisal will need to be reviewed to understand if reasonable Brownfield options exist; and whether appropriate densities and compensatory policies have been put forward.

Recent Case Law In considering the possibility of releasing sites from the Green Belt, recent case law has re-iterated the importance of understanding and defining ‘exceptional circumstances’. In preparing the Local Plan, Doncaster MBC will need to reflect on whether there are exceptional circumstances which justify the alteration of Green Belt boundaries. There is no definition of ‘exceptional circumstances’ within the NPPF, and there is very limited case history relating to decisions about the meaning. However, there are three recent relevant examples which could support local interpretation of this concept within Doncaster.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 7 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Solihull Local Plan (Solihull Metropolitan Council) In this case, a developer’s sites in Tidbury Green were placed into the Green Belt by the Solihull Local Plan (SLP) adopted in December 2013. The developer challenged the SLP on three grounds: (i) that it was not supported by an objectively assessed figure for housing need; (ii) the Council has failed in its duty to cooperate; and (iii) the Council adopted a plan without regard to the proper test for revising Green Belt boundaries. The claim succeeded at the High Court. Solihull appealed against the decision, but the appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal. The Court held that the Inspector and Solihull had failed to identify a figure for the objective assessment of housing need as a separate and prior exercise, and that was an error of law. In addition, the Judge dismissed the Inspector’s reasons for returning the developer’s sites to the Green Belt, saying that: ‘The fact that a particular site within a council’s area happens not to be suitable for housing development cannot be said without more to constitute an exceptional circumstance, justifying an alteration of the Green Belt by the allocation to it of the site in question’. Calverton Parish Council v Nottingham , Broxtowe Borough Council and Gedling Borough Council In this case, the Parish Council applied to the High Court to quash parts of the Aligned Code Strategies of the three authorities, arguing that: (i) it had failed to consider whether housing numbers should be reduced to prevent the release of Green Belt land; and (ii) it had failed to apply national policy in considering its release. However, the Claim was rejected. In Paragraph 42 of the decision, referring to the earlier Solihull decision, the Judge stated: ‘In the case where the issue is the converse, i.e. subtraction, the fact that Green Belt reasons may continue to exist cannot preclude the existence of countervailing exceptional circumstance – otherwise, it would be close to impossible to revise the boundary. These circumstances, if found to exist, must be logically capable of trumping the purposes of the Green Belt; but whether they should not in any given case must depend on the correct identification of the circumstances said to be exceptional, and the strength of the Green Belt purposes’. While supporting the earlier Solihull case, the judgement also confirms that ‘exceptional circumstances’ may override the purposes set out in the NPPF, depending on the strength of these purposes. In determining what is exceptional, an authority should ‘identify and then grapple with the following matters’5: • The ‘acuteness/intensity of the housing need’; • The ‘constraints on the supply/availability of land…suitable for development’;

5 Paragraph 51, Case No: CO/4846/2014: Calverton Parish Council Claimant and (1) ; (2) Broxtowe Borough Council, (3) Gedling Borough Council and (1) Peveril Securities Limited (2) Ukpp (Toton) Limited

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 8 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

• The ‘difficulties in achieving sustainability without impinging on the green belt’; • The ‘nature and extent of the harm to this green belt’; and • How far the impacts on green belt purposes could be reduced. In his decision, the Judge believed the Inspector had taken a ‘sensible and appropriate’ approach to adjudging the weight of exceptional circumstances versus the strength of the Green Belt purposes by weighing up the advantages and disadvantages of different alternative options for meeting housing need, including those which would not have involved Green Belt adjustments. There is no definition of matters which constitute ‘exceptional circumstances’, as set out within Paragraph 83. Recent case law provides some context to the possible interpretation within Doncaster. However, there may be additional local factors which may be applicable to Doncaster, and therefore it is advised that the potential local interpretation of ‘exceptional circumstances’ is defined and reflected on as the Local Plan progresses. This reflection process will be particularly necessary should the ‘tests’ within the Housing White Paper be taken through Parliament.

2.3 Local Planning Context The development plan for Doncaster comprises the Core Strategy (adopted May 2012), and the Joint Waste Plan (March 2012) saved policies from the Unitary Development Plan (adopted July 1998). The Council is currently pursuing a new composite Local Plan that will include strategic policies and site specific allocations. The Stage 1 Green Belt Review Methodology and Proformas details the Local Policy Context and relevant policies within these Local Plan documents. Therefore, it is only necessary to review the documents that have been released since which include: • Site Selection Methodology and Housing/ Employment Needs Assessments (2015); • Doncaster Local Plan Homes and Settlements paper (March 2016); • Sustainability Appraisal (SA) of Doncaster’s Growth Options (March 2016).

Doncaster Local Plan Homes and Settlements Paper (March 2016) The Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016) paper, which was consulted on between March and April 2016, sets out the proposed number of new homes planned and their proposed distribution across Doncaster. Following emerging information from the Issues and Options consultation, the proposed housing distribution and the settlement hierarchy has changed since the Stage 1 Green Belt Review. The changes to the settlement hierarchy have important implications for the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal. The changes

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 9 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

mean it is necessary to look again at the local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes, especially Purpose 1 ‘To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas’; and Purpose 2 ‘To prevent neighbouring from merging into one another’. The changes in the settlement hierarchy and the effect of these changes are explored in detail below. Purpose 1: Comparing Definitions of the Main Urban Area The definition of the Main Urban Area set out within the Core Strategy (2012) was amended by the Issues and Options Draft of the Local Plan in July 2015. This amend resulted in the Main Urban Area containing ‘continuous built-up area from Bentley in the north to and Cantley in the south, and from in the west to Edenthorpe and Kirk Sandall in the east. This change was already reflected in the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, and therefore does not affect the approach taken to analysing the Green Belt, as all of the locations mentioned above were already included as part of the Main Urban Area.

Proposed Revisions to the Stage No, the definition of ‘Large Built-up Area’ will remain the 1 Local Interpretation of the same as set out in the Stage 1 Green Belt Review (which Five Purposes of the Green Belt used the Core Strategy definition of the ‘Main Urban Area’ as amended by the Issues and Options Draft, as advised by DMBC). The local interpretation as defined in Purpose 1 will remain the same.

Purpose 2: Comparing Definitions of Tier 2 and Tier 3 Settlements Since the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016) has re-structured the Tier 2 and Tier 3 settlements: • Settlements previously named “Large Urban Areas”, have now become “Main Towns”, but the number of settlements within this category has remained unchanged. • Settlements previously named “Small Urban Areas”, have become “Service Towns and Villages”. In addition, this tier of settlement has been split and sub-categories created, called “Smaller Coalfield Towns” and “Larger Villages”. • All of the settlements previously called “Small Urban Areas” have in fact now become “Small Coalfield Towns”. However, the introduction of the sub- category of “Larger Villages” within the overall “Service Towns and Villages” means that certain settlements gain an elevated status. Table 1 compares the change in settlements included for Tier 2 and Tier 3 settlements. The change in categories and sub-categories represents a material change since the original Stage 1 Green Belt Review. The effect is that Barnburgh and Harlington (as the only settlement within this sub-category that is within the Green Belt) is elevated to ‘neighbouring towns’ status within the local interpretation of Purpose 2.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 10 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Table 1 Settlements included in Tier 2 and Tier 3 of the settlement hierarchy Draft Issues and Options (2015) Homes and Settlements Strategy Consultation (2016) Large Urban Areas: Small Urban Areas Main Towns Service towns and villages, formed by Smaller Coalfield Towns and Larger Villages Dunscroft, Dunsville, Carcroft and , Dunscroft, Dunsville, Carcroft & Skellow, Hatfield and , Hatfield, Stainforth; Sprotbrough , Stainforth , Thorne & ; Edlington, Thorne and Moorends , & Askern Conisbrough and Denaby; Tickhill, Denaby . ; Bawtry. Mexborough ; Armthorpe ; Barnby Dun, Auckley & Rossington Adwick & Hayfield Green, Barnburgh & Adwick and Woodlands. Harlington, . Woodlands

Proposed Revisions • Given the ‘Small Urban Areas’ within the Draft Issues and Options to the Stage 1 Local (2015) are the same as the ‘Smaller Coalfield Towns’ within the Interpretation of the Homes and Settlements paper, it is prudent to consider both of Five Purposes of these within the Assessment of Purpose 2. the Green Belt • Both the ‘Larger Villages’ and ‘Smaller Coalfield Towns’ have been given a new housing requirement, it is prudent to consider both of these within the Assessment of Purpose 2. • This means only ‘Barnburgh and Harlington’, which are settlements in the Green Belt will be elevated to ‘Neighbouring Towns’ within local interpretation of Purpose 2, when compared to the Stage 1 assessment.

Comparing Definitions of ‘Larger Villages’ and ‘Defined Villages’ As noted above, the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016) paper elevates some of the ‘Larger Villages’ within a higher overall category in the settlement hierarchy. As such, there are some settlements which were previously known as “Larger Villages”, but which have now become “Defined Villages”. Table 2 compares the settlements as previously defined in the Local Plan Issues and Options Draft (July 2015), versus what is now proposed in the Homes and Settlements paper. The Stage 1 Green Belt Review considered, through dialogue with Doncaster Officers, that there were a number of ‘inset villages’ which could be at risk of coalescing with defined ‘towns’. The interpretation of Purpose 2 has therefore been locally adapted to retain the existing development pattern between ‘towns’ and ‘inset villages’. The change in categorisation therefore represents a material change since the original Stage 1 Green Belt Review. The effect is that all of the “Defined Villages” will be assessed under Purpose 2, and considered as ‘inset villages’. Purpose 2 will consider their opportunity to merge with Tier 2 or Tier 3 settlements as set out above.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 11 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Table 2 Comparison of Large Villages defined in Issues and Options and Defined Villages in the Homes and Settlements paper

Issues and Options Draft Local Plan Settlement Homes and Settlements Strategy Hierarchy (2015) Consultation Version (2016) Larger Villages (which become ‘Service Towns 40 Defined Villages and Villages’ in the Homes and Settlements Strategy) Barnby Dun Finningley Adwick-upon-Dearne; Arksey; ; Auckley & Hayfield Green ; ; Braithwaite; Branton; Barnburgh & Harlington ; Burghwallis; Cadeby; Larger Villages (which become ‘Defined Villages’ ; Clayton; Clifton; Fenwick; ; Hampole; Hatfield Woodhouse; in the Homes and Settlements Strategy) Hickelton; Highfields; ; Toll Bar and Almholme Branton Hooton Pagnell; ; Hatfield Woodhouse Norton Lindholme; ; Marr; Micklebring; Highfields Campsall Moss; Norton; Old Cantley; Old Denaby; Arksey Old Edlington; Owston; Pickburn; Blaxton Skelbrooke; Stainton; Sutton; Sykehouse; Thorpe in ; Toll Bar; Wadworth

Proposed Revisions to the All Large Villages, which have become ‘Defined Villages’ will Stage 1 Local Interpretation all be considered as ‘inset villages’ and assessed under Purpose of the Five Purposes of the 2 where they have an opportunity to merge with Tier 2 or Tier 3 Green Belt settlements.

Sustainability Appraisal of Doncaster’s Growth Options Report (March 2016) Alongside the Homes and Settlements paper, Doncaster MBC also consulted on an updated Sustainability Appraisal (SA) of Doncaster's Growth Options. These growth options were: • Growth Option 1: Core Strategy approach (business as usual), which maintains the current strategy contained within the Core Strategy. • Growth Option 2: Doncaster main town focus, which is based on higher levels of growth in the main urban area of Doncaster and main towns (e.g. Armthorpe, Mexborough and Thorne) with reductions in the surrounding areas. • Growth Option 3: Greater Dispersal, an option which distributes growth across a wider range of settlements such as smaller market towns and free- standing villages. • Hybrid Option: The consultation also focusses on a fourth, preferred approach, which is largely based on a combination of Options 1 and 2. This option highlights the benefits of concentrating growth within the main urban area, main towns and existing service centres, which provide good access to infrastructure and service, such as public transport links, shops, leisure facilities and open space.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 12 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Summary: Whilst the SA is likely to have a limited impact on the definition of the methodology for re-appraising Green Belt sites, the Homes and Settlements paper has generated some material changes in the settlement hierarchy, and it is important that these changes are reflected within the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re- appraisal of the Green Belt. The most significant effect is on the use of Purpose 2 in the re-appraisal. The following changes to Purpose 2 are: • ‘Smaller Coalfield Towns’ and ‘Larger Villages’ have been incorporated as Tier 3 settlements, and will be included within the assessment of ‘Neighbouring Towns’ within the re-appraisal against Purpose 2. Specifically, Barnburgh and Harlington will be considered as a ‘Neighbouring Town’ under Purpose 2. • All Large Villages, which become ‘Defined Villages’ in the Homes and Settlements paper will all be considered as ‘inset villages’. These will be assessed under Purpose 2 where they have an opportunity to merge with Tier 2 or Tier 3 settlements.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 13 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Figure 2 Revised Settlement Hierarchy (note changes to Hierarchy tiers and the revision to the status of Barnburgh and Harlington)

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 14 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

3 Approach to Green Belt Site Re-appraisal

3.1 Overview The following section of the report sets out the approach to the re-appraisal of Green Belt sites. Specifically, it sets out the ‘starting point’ for the assessment, followed by a detailed review of the methodology for assessment. This methodology largely utilises that approach set out within the Stage 1 Green Belt Review: Methodology and Proformas. The final section of this chapter sets out scenarios for using outcomes from this appraisal.

3.2 Starting Point for Assessment The ‘Starting Point for Assessment’ uses the Stage 2 Technical Site Assessment work that has been undertaken in-house by Doncaster MBC. Specifically, this includes sites that have emerged through the ‘Call for Sites’ which have then been assessed against the criteria within the HELAA and the SA. The outcomes of these assessments, a total of 55 Green Belt sites, will be used as the ‘starting point’ for the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal. To ensure an independent and objective assessment, this report does not seek to validate or review the detail within the site selection methodologies or SA (the Stage 2 Technical Site Constraints Assessment) undertaken by Doncaster MBC.

3.3 Proposed Methodology for Assessment

Step 1 – Summarise the Performance of the General Area The first stage of the assessment is to summarise the performance of the General Area against the “Local Interpretation” of the five purposes of the Green Belt, undertaken in the Stage 1 Green Belt Review: Methodology and Proformas. As Green Belt is a strategic designation, this step is necessary to summarise the wider context for each of the Green Belt sites. In addition, the Stage 1 Green Belt Review: Methodology and Proformas assessment assumed that the ‘score offered to each General Area represents a professional judgement and will be the most reflective of the characteristics of the area’. Given the proposed Green Belt sites for assessment in the Stage 3 work are more reflective of a ‘local’ rather than ‘strategic’ scale, there may be instances where the assessment attributable to the individual proposed Green Belt site is not wholly reflective of the assessment of the wider General Area.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 15 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Step 2 – Extent to which Resultant Green Belt boundary forms a ‘clearly defined, readily recognisable boundary which is likely to be permanent’ Requirement Chapter 9 of the NPPF sets out policies relating to the purpose, role and designation of Green Belt. The chapter emphasises that the ‘essential characteristics of Green Belt are their openness and permanence’ (Paragraph 79). Paragraph 85 of the NPPF states that: “when defining boundaries, Local Planning Authorities should: • Ensure consistency with the Local Plan strategy for meeting identified requirements for sustainable development; • Not include land which it is unnecessary to keep permanently open; • Where necessary, identify in their plans areas of ‘safeguarded land’ between the urban area and the Green Belt, in order to meet longer-term development needs stretching well beyond the plan period; • Make clear that the safeguarded land is not allocated for development at the present time. Planning permission for the permanent development of safeguarded land should only be granted following a Local Plan review which proposes the development; • Satisfy themselves that Green Belt boundaries will not need to be altered at the end of the development plan period; and • Define boundaries clearly, using physical features that are readily recognisable and likely to be permanent”. It is therefore necessary to assess whether the Resultant Green Belt boundary created through release of the site would be a clearly defined, readily recognisable and boundary which is likely to be permanent. Proposed Approach Within the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal, the proposed Resultant Green Belt boundary, created by indentation around the proposed Green Belt site, will be assessed for its ability to demonstrate a boundary which is clearly defined, using physical features that are readily recognisable and which are likely to be permanent. Boundary identification reflects this national requirement as stated in Table 3. The assessment is concluded with a review of whether the boundaries are considered to be: • ‘Strong’ Features which define the outer ‘Resultant’ boundary of the Green Belt are strongly defined, recognisable and likely to be permanent. • ‘Mixed in Strength’ boundary features, which contain a number of outer features that are considered to be strong, durable and likely to be permanent,

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 16 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

and a number of outer boundary features which are weak, not recognisable and not likely to be permanent. • ‘Weak’ boundary features. This description will be applied to proposed Green Belt sites where the Resultant Green Belt boundary will be predominantly defined by features lacking in durability, or on sites where there is a single boundary that is not defined using any visible infrastructure or natural feature on the ground (unless other features are very strong). Table 3 Assessing the Strength of the Resultant Green Belt Boundaries NPPF Strength Description of Boundary Durable/ Infrastructure: ‘Recognisable and • Motorway; likely to be • Public and made roads or strongly defined footpath/track; Permanent’ • A railway line (operational or disused); Features • Existing residential, industrial or mixed use development with a clearly established, regular or consistent boundaries. Landform: • Strongly defined stream, river, canal or other watercourse; • Prominent physical features (e.g. ridgeline); • Protected woodland, dense woodland or hedges which are continuous or dense; • Features lacking Infrastructure: in durability/ Not • Private/ unmade roads; readily • Existing development with weak, irregular, inconsistent or intermediate recognisable or boundaries. likely to be Natural: permanent • Field Boundary; • Sparse or gappy tree line; • Shallow drainage ditch, field drain or culverted watercourse.

Step 3 – Re-appraise the Proposed Site against the Local Interpretation of Green Belt Purposes Step 3 of the Green Belt re-appraisal comprises the review of proposed Green Belt sites against the “Local Interpretation” of the five Green Belt purposes. The outcome of this assessment will be the identification of a score against each sub- criteria for each of the 55 proposed Green Belt sites. For consistency, proposed Green Belt sites will be assessed using largely the same methodology as that set out in Stage 1 Green Belt Review from February 20166, however, it is possible for overall outcomes to be different given the difference in scales of assessment. The Purpose of this assessment is therefore not to repeat the Stage 1 assessment in its entirety, it is to calibrate the assessment of the General Area for the proposed Green Belt site. The full detailed Stage 1 Methodology has been appended to this Report. The following section summarises the overall approach to assessment and sets out variations as necessary to proposed Stage 1 Green Belt Review.

6 http://www.doncaster.gov.uk/services/planning/green-belt-review

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 17 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas

Sub-Criteria • Proposed Green Belt site represents open land which is contiguous to, connected to or in close proximity to a ‘large built up area’. • Proposed Green Belt site sprawl of the built form, which would not otherwise be restricted by a durable boundary. The scoring of this purpose, the definition of the ‘Large Built up Areas’ and the method for the assessment of the extent to which the designation within the proposed Green Belt site is considered to check the unrestricted sprawl of this ‘Large Built up Area’ will remain the same as the Stage 1 Green Belt Review. Purpose 2: To prevent Neighbouring Towns from merging into one another

Sub- • Proposed Green Belt site resists development that would result in merging, Criteria coalescence or significant erosion, both physical or visually of a valued gap between neighbouring settlements within the District. • Proposed Green Belt boundary has resisted ribbon development which would otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements.

Given the settlement hierarchy has changed since the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, it is now prudent to consider the Doncaster Main Urban, Seven Main Towns7 and 10 Service Towns and Villages8 as ‘neighbouring towns’. The definition of ‘Towns’ within neighbouring Local Authorities (set out in Table 8 within the Stage 1 Green Belt Assessment) will remain the same for the assessment of Purpose 2. The assessment will also be based on reviewing the physical, visual and perceptual scale of the gap (in the landscape context, visual context and perceptual context). Similar to the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal assesses whether the ‘potential Green Belt site’ falls within and maintains or erodes an ‘Essential’, ‘Largely Essential or Wide Gap’ and ‘Less Essential Gap’. The second sub-criteria, will include a review of whether the existing Green Belt boundary and the proposed Green Belt site would continue to ‘resist’, ‘resist in part’ or ‘allow unrestricted ribbon development’ which would perceptibly reduce the separation between settlements and which does not pre-date the existing Green Belt boundary. The definitions within the Stage 1 Green Belt Review and the scoring this assessment will be retained.

7 Dunscroft, Dunsville, Hatfield, Stainforth; Thorne & Moorends; Conisbrough & Denaby; Mexborough; Armthorpe; Rossington; Adwick & Woodlands. 8 Carcroft & Skellow, Sprotbrough Village Edlington, Askern Tickhill, Bawtry.Barnby Dun Auckley & Hayfield Green Barnburgh & Harlington Finningley

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 18 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Purpose 3: To assist in Safeguarding the Countryside from Encroachment

Sub- Sensitivity of the Green Belt and features within the proposed site important to Criteria the appreciation of the countryside to change. Extent to which these Green Belt features within the proposed site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’.

Using the methodology and scoring set out in the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, proposed Green Belt sites will be re-appraised against the ‘Arup-defined Green Belt Sensitivity to Development’9 to understand the extent to which these areas contain features sensitive to encroachment. Features within proposed Green Belt sites will then be assessed for the extent to which this role has been impacted by encroachment of built form. Each proposed Green Belt site will then be attributed to one of the following criteria. These are lifted from the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, and the percentages remain the same: • Strong Unspoilt Rural Character: A proposed Green Belt site which contains almost no built form (less than 0.05%) and displays unspoilt levels of openness. • Strong Rural Character: A proposed Green Belt site which contains a general lack of built form (between 0.05% and 1%) and is mostly characterised by rural land uses, such as agricultural uses, outdoor sport and recreational facilities, cemeteries and other ‘open’ uses of land. There is sporadic built form and a limited number of man-made structures however this is largely linked to rural land uses. • Moderately Strong Rural Character: A proposed Green Belt site where there is low levels of built form (between 1% and 2%) which is largely linked to rural land uses, but there is evidence of low levels of ‘non-Green Belt’ or urbanised uses. • Semi-Urban Character: A proposed Green Belt site where there is a semi- urban character (between 2% and 6%), with apparent levels of ‘non Green Belt uses’. • Moderately-Urban Character: A proposed Green Belt site which is characterised by moderately strong urban character (6% and above) and non- Green Belt uses. Again, qualification is necessary at this stage as there may be a number of Green Belt uses10 which strongly impact on the openness of the proposed Green Belt site. Assessments may be calibrated by one category. In addition, there may be instances where there is no built form within a proposed Green Belt site, however where the area is not considered to display an ‘unspoilt character’ as a result of strategic infrastructure or levels of containment. Again, these sites will be calibrated by one category.

9 Table 11, Stage 1 Green Belt Review 10 Set out in Paragraph 89 of the NPPF.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 19 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Purpose 4: To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns

Sub-Criteria Proposed Green Belt site has a role in supporting the character of the Historic Town or Place within the Borough. Proposed Green Belt site has a role in supporting the views into and out of the historic core.

The assessment will be the same as in the Stage 1 Green Belt Review. The scoring set out within the Stage 1 Green Belt Review and the proposed assessment criteria will be retained, summarised as follows: • The definition of ‘Historic Towns’ within Doncaster will remain the same as those set out within Table 13 of the Stage 1 Green Belt Review: these include Doncaster, Conisbrough, Mexborough, Tickhill and Bawtry. • The Historic Places within a 5km radius of Doncaster’s Local Authority boundary will also remain the same as that set out within Table 14. • Nearby Historic Elements will be assessed for their proximity to the Proposed Green Belt site. This will be followed by the Green Belt within the area will be assessed for its role in preserving the historic core. Purpose 5: Assisting in Urban Regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land’

Sub-Criteria • Doncaster Urban Area. • Conisborough. • Askern. • Edlington. • Adwick / Woodlands. • Rossington. • Carcroft / Skellow. • Denaby • Mexborough. The Doncaster Core Strategy (2012) defines a number of regeneration objectives for specific areas within the Borough which are set out in the Stage 1 Green Belt Review as above. Proposed Green Belt sites which are considered to be contiguous or connected to any of the regeneration priority areas outlined the settlements listed above. The assessment criteria for Purpose 5 have therefore been retained within the Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal.

Step 4 – Summary of Re-appraisal The final stage of the Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal will provide a summary of the following: • A review of how the Stage 1 General Area performed against the strategic assessment of Green Belt; • An appraisal of the proposed Green Belt boundary, and whether this would represent a ‘strongly defined and durable’ resultant Green Belt site boundary; and • A review of the re-appraisal of land against the “Local Interpretation” of the five purposes of the Green Belt, which will also include an assessment of how the site would functionally relate to an inset settlement.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 20 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

3.4 Assumptions The Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal of land is based on the following assumptions. • That the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal is read in conjunction with the Stage 1 Green Belt Review: Methodology and Proformas. • The Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal does not seek to validate the site selection work undertaken in-house by Doncaster MBC. Instead, the re- appraisal seeks to assess the implications of removing an area of Green Belt against the “Local Interpretation” of the five purposes of the Green Belt, and to re-appraise the strength of a Resultant Green Belt boundary. • Whilst proposed Green Belt sites will be assessed using largely the same methodology as that set out in Stage 1 Green Belt Review from February 201611, it is possible for overall outcomes to be different given the difference in scales of assessment. The purpose of this assessment is not to repeat the Stage 1 work, but it to calibrate the original assessment of the General Area for the proposed Green Belt site. • The Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal does not set out whether sites should be released from the Green Belt. This will remain a decision for Doncaster MBC based of a combination of factors, such as: acuteness and intensity of housing need, constraints on the supply and availability of land, nature and extent of harm to the Green Belt and balance between sustainable developments without impinging on the Green Belt to support the definition of exceptional circumstances. • Professional judgement will be used to assess the strength of proposed Green Belt boundary, or the extent to which a proposed Green Belt site performs against the “Local Interpretation” of the five Green Belt purposes in circumstances where the site has a mixed role. • The “Local Interpretation” of Green Belt Purpose 4 (‘Preserving the Setting and Special Character of a Historic Town’) focuses on the ‘Complex Historic Town Cores’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environmental Characterisation Project (2004 – 2008). Given the high level and strategic nature of the Stage 1 Green Belt Review, and the Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re- appraisal, this assessment does not preclude the needs for a Heritage Impact Assessment to be carried out within future site selection processes, or as part of any subsequent planning applications. • Again, as the Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal focuses on the extent to which the Green Belt site fulfils the “Local Interpretation” of the five Green Belt purposes; and does not substitute any other local plan evidence base documents, this assessment does not preclude the need for a Green Infrastructure Strategy, Landscape Strategy, Landscape Character Assessment or Landscape and Visual Assessment of specific sites.

11 http://www.doncaster.gov.uk/services/planning/green-belt-review

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 21 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

• The summary of the Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal is not based on an aggregate scoring system, or an assessment against pre-determined thresholds. It is considered that aggregation of scoring hides the often subtle variation between the Green Belt sites, and their role within the South Yorkshire Green Belt. Therefore, the summaries provided will require further consideration alongside other evidence, and will need to be incorporated as part of the Council’s own site selection work before any sites could be identified in the emerging Local Plan. • Each of the proposed Green Belt sites has been assessed in isolation for the strength of their proposed Green Belt boundary features and the Resultant Boundary, followed by an assessment of the extent to which the Green Belt site performs against the “Local Interpretation” of the five Green Belt purposes. Should it be the case, that later within the local plan-making process proposed Green Belt sites are amalgamated by Doncaster MBC, then it is suggested that these newly constructed sites will need to be re-assessed against the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal methodology. • Both proposed sites for employment and proposed sites for housing have been assessed in the same approach. • Doncaster MBC anticipates, having regard to the development requirement and growth distribution strategy, that only a relatively small number of the 55 sites will be required for release from the green belt but need to understand the relative merits of different sites in terms of green belt impacts to place alongside other site selection considerations including SA findings, viability appraisal, and flood sequential testing so as to inform overall decisions about site selection.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 22 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

4 Summarising the Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

4.1 Overview In order to help bring the Stage 3 work to a coherent conclusion, it has been possible to assign indicative grades to both the assessment of the Green Belt sites’ boundary strength; and the Green Belt sites’ performance against the “Local Interpretation” of the five Green Belt purposes. The methodology for the grading is set out in Table 4 and Table 5 below. A summary of the overall outcome for each of the 55 Green Belt sites can be found in Appendix 1. The detailed information on each of the 55 Green Belt sites is set out within the proformas found in Appendix 2.

4.2 Grading Table 4 and Table 5 set out the indicative thresholds for summarising the ‘Boundary Strength’ and ‘Performance against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt’ of the proposed Green Belt sites. Grading: Boundary Strength Proposed Green Belt sites were assessed for the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary. This assessment uses the wording set out in ‘Step 2: Extent to which the Resultant Green Belt Boundary forms a clearly defined, readily recognisable boundary which is likely to be permanent’. Table 4 Assessment of the Strength of the Proposed Green Belt Boundary

Grading Boundary Strength Weak Weak boundary features. This description will be applied to Proposed Green Belt Sites where the Resultant Green Belt boundary will be predominantly defined by features lacking in durability, or on sites where there is a single boundary that is not defined using any visible infrastructure or natural feature on the ground (unless other features are very strong). Mixed in Mixed in Strength boundary features, which contain a number of outer features Strength that are considered to be strong, durable and likely to be permanent, and a number of outer boundary features which are weak, not recognisable and not likely to be permanent. Strong Strong Features which define the outer ‘Resultant’ boundary of the Green Belt are strongly defined, recognisable and likely to be permanent.

Grading: Local Interpretation of Green Belt Purposes Table 5 sets out indicative ‘grading’ or thresholds by which proposed Green Belt sites are considered to perform ‘strongly’, ‘moderately’ or weakly’ when assessed against the “Local Interpretation” of the five Green Belt purposes. These ‘gradings’ are not purely arithmetic, but instead are considered to be indicative, based on ‘natural breaks in scoring’ and based on a reasoned

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 23 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

professional judgement arising from the individual scorings of proposed Green Belt sites against the “Local Interpretation” of five Green Belt purposes. Table 5 Assessment of the extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Site performs against the Local Interpretation of the Five Green Belt Purposes

Grading Indicative Summary of Performance against Green Belt Purposes Strongly Performs Proposed Green Belt Sites which score: a 5 and two 4’s or higher across against Local any single sub-criteria for any Purpose in the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re- Interpretation of appraisal. Other combinations could include 5, 5, 5 or 5, 5, 4. the Green Belt These Sites are considered to perform strongly when assessed against the Purposes Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Moderately Proposed Green Belt Site which scores a 4 and two 3’s or higher across Performs against any single sub-criteria for any Purpose in the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re- Local appraisal. There may be an occurrence of one ‘5’, however this must not Interpretation of be in the presence of two or more 4’s. Other combinations could include: the Green Belt 5, 4, 3; or 4, 4, 3; or 4, 4, 4. Purposes These Sites are considered to perform moderately when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Weakly Performs Proposed Green Belt Site which scores 3, 3 and 3 or lower across any against Local single sub-criteria for any Purpose in the Stage 3 assessment. Other Interpretation of combinations could include: 3, 2, 2; 2, 2, 2 or lower. the Green Belt These Sites are considered to perform weakly when assessed against the Purposes Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 24 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

5 Conclusion

5.1 Overview The final section of the Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal summarises the outcomes of the work, advises how these outcomes could potentially be aligned to local plan-making, and sets out further actions for Doncaster MBC to consider.

5.2 Summary of Assessment Outcomes Having considered both the boundary strength, and the “Local Interpretation” of five Green Belt purposes, it is natural to link the two elements together. Indeed, Appendix 1 does this, and allows for an overall analysis of each of the 55 sites by marrying the two parts of assessment together. The ultimate decision on whether to release sites from the Green Belt must take place during the local plan-making process. As such, it is not appropriate for this study to make specific conclusions about which sites (if any) should be released. Doncaster MBC has confirmed that further site selection work will happen during the production of the local plan, and it will be during this process that firm decisions can be taken. However, to help inform the site selection process, and to help differentiate the 55 Green Belt sites, it has been possible to define a “Strength of Case” for each site based on a comparison of the two elements of the Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re- appraisal. The “Strength of Case” matrix is set out in Table 6 below. By considering the relationship between boundary strength, and the “Local Interpretation” of the five Green Belt purposes, different categories of case can be derived. These are: • Strong Case; • Moderately Strong Case; • Moderate Case; • Moderately Weak Case; and • Weak Case. Again, these categories are indicative, and represent matters of judgement. They are meant to serve as an instructive way of moving Doncaster MBC towards the more detailed site selection work. Should any subsequent work identify sites to be released from the Green Belt, Doncaster MBC will need to ensure that ‘exceptional circumstances’ have been demonstrated.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 25 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Table 6 Indicative ‘Strength of Case’ Matrix

Boundary Strong Boundary Mixed in Strength Weak Boundary Strength Boundary Performance against Green Belt Purposes Weakly Performs Strong Case for Moderately Strong Moderate Case for against Local inclusion within further Case for inclusion inclusion within Interpretation of the Site Selection work: within further Site further Site Selection Green Belt Strong Boundary and Selection work: work: Weak Purposes Weakly Performing Mixed in Strength Boundary Strength Boundary and Boundary but Weakly Performing Weakly Performing Moderately Moderately Strong Moderate Case for Moderately Weak Performs against Case for inclusion inclusion within Case for inclusion Local Interpretation within further Site further Site Selection within further Site of the Green Belt Selection work: Strong work: Mixed in Selection work: Purposes Boundary and Strength Boundary Weak Boundary but Moderately Performing and Moderately Moderately Performing Performing Strongly Performs Moderate Case for Moderately Weak Weak Case for against Local inclusion within further Case for inclusion inclusion within Interpretation of the Site Selection work: within further Site further Site Selection Green Belt Strong Boundary but Selection work: work: Weak Purposes Strongly Performing Mixed in Strength Boundary and Boundary but Strongly Performing Strongly Performing Based on the Strength of Case matrix, it has been possible to differentiate the 55 sites as follows: • One proposed Green Belt site whereby there is a Strong Case for furthering through the Doncaster MBC site selection process. • Eight proposed Green Belt sites where a Moderately Strong Case exists for furthering through the Doncaster MBC site selection process. • 18 proposed Green Belt sites were a Moderate Case exists for furthering through the Doncaster MBC site selection process. • 19 proposed Green Belt sites where there is a Moderately Weak Case for furthering through the Doncaster MBC site selection process. • Nine proposed Green Belt sites were a Weak Case exists for furthering through the Doncaster MBC site selection process. It is suggested that Doncaster MBC reflects on the relative Strength of Case for each of the 55 sites in taking forward the site selection process during the course of producing the local plan.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 26 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

5.3 Aligning Outputs from the Stage 3 Re-appraisal with Progression of Sites through the Local Plan The Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal itself does not constitute a decision to release land from the Green Belt. Alongside a framework of other information, including the assessment of objectively assessed need and finalised site selection methodology, the outcomes of this Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal will contribute towards decisions about sites to be allocated within the emerging Local Plan. Any release of land from the Green Belt would need to be supported by the identification of ‘exceptional circumstances’ within Doncaster. The Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-Appraisal does not represent the end of a process; indeed, it is likely to result in a range of outcomes, which will require different targeted responses from Doncaster MBC.

5.4 Next Steps In utilising this Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal, Doncaster MBC should consider the following recommendations and next steps: • The outcomes of this Stage 3 Green Belt Site Re-appraisal should be used to help progress the Council’s site selection work. Whilst the local plan-making process is the correct vehicle to consider the potential release of sites from the Green Belt, the weight given to Green Belt designation, alongside the emerging intentions within the Housing White Paper, serve as a reminder that the potential release of Green Belt sites require careful consideration and must be supported by extremely robust justification, and a thorough appraisal of alternative solutions. • On this basis, the Council will need to confirm what factors, if any, will constitute ‘exceptional circumstances’ that would justify the release of Green Belt sites. Realistically, exceptional circumstances for removing land from the Green Belt are likely to derive from a balance of factors. Determining exceptional circumstances will need to draw on the ‘Strength of Case’ conclusions from Section 4.2 and 4.3. The recent legal case for Calverton Parish Council v Nottingham City Council, Broxtowe Borough Council and Gedling Borough Council case, considered that a Local Planning Authority should balance: • ‘acuteness/intensity of the housing need’; • The ‘constraints on the supply/availability of land…suitable for development’; • The ‘difficulties in achieving sustainability without impinging on the green belt’; • The ‘nature and extent of the harm to this green belt’; and • How far the impacts on green belt purposes could be reduced.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 27 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

• In determining whether there are exceptional circumstances that would justify the removal of sites from the Green Belt, the Council should also separately consider wider place-making issues. This may lead to the conclusion that certain sites may need to be amalgamated to achieve better outcomes. Where this is the case, amalgamated sites will need to be re-tested for new Resultant Boundaries and to re-test the extent to which any newly amalgamated sites would perform against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. • As set out in Paragraph 85 of the NPPF, Doncaster MBC will also need to consider the extent, quantum and location of Safeguarded Land ‘where necessary’. The first stage in defining new safeguarded land will be to identify land which is performing weakly against the Purposes of the Green Belt and which has a strongly defined boundary. Alongside these sites, there is a need to determine the requirement for Safeguarded Lane, Quantum and Location. • Future decision-making on whether to release sites from the Green Belt should be mindful of any Duty to Co-operate issues that may arise. Duty to Co- operate issues are likely to be two-fold. Firstly – in terms of immediate geographic and cross-border issues for neighbouring authorities: , , Wakefield and Selby. Secondly – in terms of matters of “need” and any consideration of housing and economic growth that would be released on Green Belt sites and whether this affects neighbouring authority’s growth strategies and objective assessment of needs.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 28 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Appendix 1: Assessment Summary

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

35 458 Land off Adwick le Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 5 3 4 4 1 1 4 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Church Lane, Street 458 Belt boundary would be defined by the Purposes (Purpose 2 and 3): The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a for inclusion within Adwick extent of shallow drainage ditch in the north moderately strong role when assessed against the local interpretation of further Site Selection east, a weakly defined field boundary with the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt site is not work: Mixed in moderate scale shrubs in central northern considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large Strength Boundary but area and a railway line in the far north. The built up area’, the Proposed Green Belt site (particularly in the northern Strongly Performing Proposed Green Belt boundary is therefore area) is considered to play a strong role in preventing neighbouring towns considered to be very strong in the far from merging. Although the Proposed Green Belt Site falls within the north, and weak elsewhere. The Proposed Conservation Area, as is not considered to be a ‘historic Green Belt and therefore the Resultant town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Site has only a Green Belt boundary are considered to be weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic mixed in strength. town. Nevertheless, when assessed for the extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, the Site is considered to contain features which are not easily replaced and therefore possess a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. As Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. 36 459 Land off Adwick le Weak: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 5 3 3 4 1 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Doncaster Street 459 would be defined by an angular area of built Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a moderately strong for inclusion within Lane, Adwick form along Doncaster Lane in the north, a role when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt further Site Selection weakly defined shallow field boundary in Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a work: Weak Boundary the east which is not supported by any other role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, the but Moderately features, and a field boundary in the south. Proposed Green Belt site (particularly in the northern area) is considered Performing The Proposed Green Belt boundary features to play a strong role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The and the Resultant Boundary would be Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a Strong Rural Character, weakly defined, weakly recognisable in the as a result of no built form within the Site; however overall, the Site is long-term and unlikely to be permanent. considered to contain features of moderate sensitivity to encroachment, Although the Proposed Green Belt Site is adjacent to the Conservation Area, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Site has only a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. As Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 1 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

37 461 Redhouse Adwick le Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 3 5 4 4 1 1 2 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Lane (a) North Street 461 Belt boundary would be defined by the Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a modest role when for inclusion within West, Adwick A1(M) and the Great North Road A638 in assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The further Site Selection the south west, the strongly defined Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in checking the work: Mixed in operational railway line in the north, unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, and a moderate role in Strength Boundary but Redhouse Lane in the south and a weakly preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The role of the Proposed Strongly Performing defined field boundary and cemetery in the Green Belt site in preventing neighbouring towns from merging would east. The Proposed Green Belt features are increase to an essential gap if development were to take place to the north therefore mixed in strength, strong in the of the railway line. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain north, south and west and weak in the east. features which are of a moderate-high sensitivity to development, which In isolation, however, release of the displays a Strong Rural Character. As Adwick le Street is not considered Proposed Green Belt site would result in a to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the weak Resultant Green Belt boundary which Proposed Green Belt Site has only a limited role in preserving the setting would acutely protrude from the A1(M) and special character of a historic town. As Adwick le Street is identified with no connection to an area of existing as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is built form. considered to have a role, albeit moderately weak, in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. 38 462 Land off Adwick le Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 0 0 3 5 1 2 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Adwick Lane, Street 462 Belt boundary would be defined by the Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site would have a moderate role inclusion within Carcroft strongly defined operational railway line in when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt purposes. further Site Selection the west, and a weakly defined field The Proposed Green Belt site would have a weak role in checking the work: Mixed in boundary in the south supported by a field unrestricted sprawl of the large built up area, no role in preventing Strength Boundary and drain in the south east. The Proposed Green neighbouring towns from merging as this has already happened through Moderately Performing Belt boundaries, and therefore the Resultant the employment land allocation and moderate role in assisting in urban Green Belt boundary, are therefore regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt site does not support the setting or considered to be mixed in strength: strongly special character of a historic town. However, the Proposed Green Belt defined in the west and weak in the south. Site is considered to have a moderate sensitivity to encroachment and 0.0% built form. If the employment allocation to the north east of the Proposed Site had been developed, the Proposed Site would be more characteristic of a Strong Rural Character. 40 512 Redhouse Adwick le Weak: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 3 0 3 4 1 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Lane (b) Street 512 would be weakly defined by a field Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role for inclusion within North East, boundary in the north and the extent of in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, and a further Site Selection Adwick weakly defined field drain in the north east. moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The role work: Weak Boundary Whilst Red House Lane predominantly of the Proposed Green Belt site in preventing neighbouring towns from but Moderately forms the southern boundary of the General merging would increase to an essential gap if development were to take Performing Area, this sharply indents in the central area place to the north of the railway line. The Green Belt at this location is around a number of field boundaries. Whilst considered to have a moderate role in safeguarding the countryside from Red House Lane to the south forms a encroachment: land contains features which are of moderate sensitivity to strongly defined and durable feature, the encroachment, and displays a ‘strong rural character’. As Adwick le Street strength of all other boundaries and the is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of weakly defined, central indented area Purpose 4, the Proposed Green Belt Site has only a limited role in means that the Proposed Green Belt preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. As Adwick Boundaries are considered to be weak. In le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green isolation, the Resultant Green Belt Belt site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in urban boundary would create an angular area of regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban residential built form which acutely extends land. to the north of Adwick le Street.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 2 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

41 513 Redhouse Adwick le Strong: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 3 0 3 4 1 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong Lane (c) Street 513 would be defined by Red House Lane in the Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role Case for inclusion South, north and east, and the extent of the Great in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, and a within further Site Adwick North Road in the east. The Resultant moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. As Selection work: Strong Green Belt boundary would therefore result Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local Boundary and in a strongly defined feature which would interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Green Belt Site has only a Moderately Performing represent a natural rounding off to north of limited role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic Adwick le Street to mirror the extent of town. As Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, built form to the west of the Great North the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderate role in Road. assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. Although the Green Belt Site contains no built form, the land at this location is considered to only be of moderate sensitivity to encroachment. The Green Belt designation at this location has a moderate role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. 11 143 Land North of Barnburgh Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 1 0 4 5 1 1 1 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Primary and Belt boundary would be created by a Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in checking the inclusion within School, Harlington weakly defined field boundary in the east unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, a weak role in assisting in further Site Selection Church Lane, 143 and south east, the rear of residential urban regeneration and a weak role in preserving the setting and special work: Mixed in Barnburgh dwellings along Fox Lane in the north and character of a historic town. The Proposed Green Belt site would support Strength Boundary and copse of trees in the north west. Whilst the a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and have Moderately Performing Proposed Green Belt Boundary features are a moderate-strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from Mixed in Strength, the Resultant Green Belt encroachment. boundary would be formed by a stepped and angular area of residential built form which would be more coherent than existing provision. 42 777 'Plot 3', Barnburgh Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 3 0 2 1 1 1 1 Weakly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong Harlington and Belt boundary is defined by the extent of Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in checking the Case for inclusion Harlington residential development along Mill Lane, a unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, a weak role in assisting in within further Site 777 field boundary supported by a pylon in the urban regeneration and a weak role in preserving the setting and special Selection work: Mixed south and built form in the east. Whilst the character of a historic town. The Proposed Green Belt site would support in Strength Boundary southern boundary is defined by somewhat a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The and Weakly weak features, release of the Proposed Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in assisting in safeguarding the Performing Green Belt Site would result in a strong and countryside from encroachment. linear, readily recognisable and likely to be permanent Green Belt boundary created by reflecting the extent of the built form at this location.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 3 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

9 141 Westwood Bawtry 141 Strong : The proposed Green Belt 1 0 0 1 4 2 1 1 Weakly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Strong Case for Road, Bawtry boundary would be defined by a strongly Purposes: Given the scale and the distinctly separate nature of the inclusion within defined wooded area, which is likely to be Proposed Green Belt Site from the wider General Area, the Proposed Site further Site Selection permanent in the west; the Doncaster performs somewhat differently to the wider General Area. The Proposed work: Strong Administrative Boundary in the south Green Belt site is considered to contain land which is of low sensitivity to Boundary and Weakly which is supported by a drain associated encroachment, however which contains no built form. The Proposed Performing with the and Westwood Road in Green Belt Site has a weak role in preserving the unrestricted sprawl of a the north east. The proposed Green Belt large built up area, makes no discernable contribution to preventing boundary features are therefore considered neighbouring towns from merging and has a limited role in preserving the to be strongly defined in the west and north setting of the historic core of Bawtry. The Green Belt at this location is east and moderately strongly defined in the not considered to have a role in supporting urban regeneration. south. Removal of the Proposed Green Belt Site would represent a strong Resultant Green Belt boundary which rounds off the built form of Bawtry. 13 146 Tickhill Road, Bawtry 146 Mixed in strength (Strong to the north and 1 3 5 4 5 2 1 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Bawtry south, and weak to the west): The proposed Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in a similar for inclusion within Green Belt boundary would be defined to manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. The Proposed Site further Site Selection the north by the strongly defined and likely performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt work: Mixed in to be durable Martin Lane, in the west by a checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, has a moderately- Strength Boundary but weakly defined field boundary which weak role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, and Strongly Performing contains occasional trees and larger shrubs has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. In particularly further to the south. The addition, the Green Belt at this location is not considered to have a role in proposed Green Belt boundary to the south assisting urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and would be defined by Tickhill Road. other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to have a strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, with no built form encroaching into the area and Site which contains features that are of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. 43 786 South of Bawtry 786 Strong (Strong boundary features, however 1 1 0 4 4 5 1 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Cockhill Resultant Boundary would be weak): The Purposes (Purpose 3 and 4): The Proposed Green Belt site performs in inclusion within Close, Bawtry Proposed Green Belt boundary would be largely the same manner as the General Area; it is considered to be further Site Selection defined by a strongly defined wooded performing a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built work: Strong corridor to the west, south and east of the up area, a weak role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and Boundary but Strongly site. These boundaries are considered to be in the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration. Performing strong, recognisable and likely to be The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderately strong permanent. Release of the Proposed Green role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment: the Site contains Belt site at this location would however features which area of moderate sensitivity to encroachment, but no result in an angular area of built form that ‘encroachment’ has taken place. The Green Belt at this location plays a would protrude beyond the existing extent strong role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, of Bawtry. Therefore, whilst the boundary however views to features within the historic core are very limited. features are considered to be strong, the Resultant Green Belt boundary is considered to be angular.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 4 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

50 873 Site A, Land Bawtry 873 Weak: The proposed Green Belt boundary 1 1 5 4 5 2 1 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for at Martin would be weakly defined by a field Purposes (Purpose 3): The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in inclusion within Common boundary supported by moderately dense a similar manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. The Proposed Site further Site Selection Farm, Bawtry field boundaries to the west, the A639 Great performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt work: Weak Boundary North Road in the east which represents a checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, has a moderately- and Strongly strongly defined Green Belt feature and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, and Performing weakly defined boundary in the north which has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging by is based on no infrastructure or natural resisting ribbon development. The Green Belt at this location is not boundaries. Whilst release of the Proposed considered to have a role in assisting urban regeneration by encouraging Green Belt site would result in a northern the recycling of derelict and other urban land, however the Site contains extension to Bawtry, the Proposed Green land which is considered to have a strong role in safeguarding the Belt boundary features, particularly to the countryside from encroachment. north, are therefore considered to be weak. 51 874 Site B Bawtry 874 Weak (strong to the east and north, and 1 1 5 4 5 2 1 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for (Safeguarded), weaker to the west and south): The Purposes (Purpose 3): The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in inclusion within Land at proposed Green Belt boundary would be a similar manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. The Proposed Site further Site Selection Martin weakly defined by a moderately dense field performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt work: Weak Boundary Common boundary to the west; the A639 Great North checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, has a moderately- Farm, Bawtry and Strongly Road in the east which represents a strongly weak role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, and Performing defined Green Belt feature; the Martin has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging Grange Farm Lane in the north which has through resisting ribbon development The Green Belt at this location is been identified as an adopted road by not considered to have a role in assisting urban regeneration by DMBC and therefore is considered to be a encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land, however, the recognisable and likely to be permanent Proposed Site does have a strong role in assisting in safeguarding the feature; and a weakly defined boundary in countryside from encroachment. the south which is based on no infrastructure or natural boundaries. In isolation, the Proposed Green Belt site would represent a remote site and an angular area of built form. The Proposed Green Belt boundary features are considered to be weak, and would create a Resultant Green Belt boundary that is formed by weak boundary features and which results in an angular and isolated area of built form. 3 42 Land to rear Carcroft and Mixed in Strength: In isolation, the 1 3 0 4 4 1 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for of Skellow Skellow 042 Proposed Green Belt Site boundary is Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role inclusion within Hall defined on all sides by a dense and in preventing the sprawl of a large built up area, a weak role in preserving further Site Selection recognisable tree boundary, which is likely the setting and special character of a ‘Historic Town’ and only a moderate work: Mixed in to be permanent. However, if the Proposed role in assisting in regeneration. The Site falls within and maintains a Strength Boundary and Green Belt site was removed from the largely essential gap between Carcroft and Skellow and Adwick le Street. Moderately Performing Green Belt, the resultant boundary to the Owing to the level of mature trees within the area, the proximity to the south of Carcroft would be acutely angular, conservation area and the high levels of containment, development at this indented and stepped. Release of the location is considered to have a moderately strong role in safeguarding the Proposed Green Belt site would therefore countryside from encroachment. result in a boundary which is weak, irregular and inconsistent.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 5 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

12 145 Land at Carcroft and Weak: The proposed outer Green Belt 1 3 5 2 4 1 1 4 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for Skellow Skellow 145 boundary comprises field boundaries in the Purposes (Purpose 2b, 3b and 5): The Proposed Green Belt boundary inclusion within east and south west which are supported by has a similar role to the wider General Area when assessed against the further Site Selection a number of medium sized boundary trees, local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The Proposed Green Belt work: Weak Boundary and a field boundary to the south. Both of site is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of and Strongly these Proposed Boundaries are weakly a ‘large built up area’, and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring Performing defined. Release of the Proposed Green Belt towns from merging. The role of the Proposed Green Belt site in site would result in an angular area of preventing neighbouring towns from merging would increase to an residential built form along Hampole Balk essential gap if development were to take place to the south of the railway Lane, which would be weaker than the line. The Proposed Site is considered to contain land which is of a low- existing Green Belt boundary. moderate sensitivity to development, and which contains no built form. As Carcroft and Skellow is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Green Belt Site has only a limited role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. However, as Carcroft and Skellow are identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. 16 165 Land North of Carcroft and Strong: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 1 0 3 4 1 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong the A1, Skellow 165 would be defined by the A1(M) in the west Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site would perform in a largely Case for inclusion Skellow and Green Lane in the North. The Proposed similar manner to the wider General Area. The Proposed Site is not within further Site Green Belt boundary features are therefore considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, Selection work: Strong considered to be strong and the Resultant nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, and the Boundary and Green Belt boundary would result in a Site is considered to have only a moderate role in assisting in urban Moderately Performing natural rounding off of Skellow. regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a less essential gap between Skellow and Burghwallis, and the Site is considered to have a moderate-strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. 17 185 Land at Mill Carcroft and Weak: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 1 0 4 5 1 1 4 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for Lane and Skellow 185 would be defined by an agricultural field Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site would perform in a largely inclusion within Crabgate, boundary in the north and east, and an area similar manner to the wider General Area. The Proposed Site is not further Site Selection Skellow of residential built form off Mill Lane in the considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, work: Weak Boundary west. The Proposed Green Belt boundaries nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, and the and Strongly are therefore considered to be Site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban Performing predominantly weak. Whilst the resultant regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban Green Belt boundary would round-off the land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a less angularity of the existing Green Belt essential gap between Skellow and Burghwallis. However, the land within boundary, the outcome would not be any the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderately strong stronger than what already exists. role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, owing to the site containing features which are of moderately-strong sensitivity to encroachment and no existing encroachment.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 6 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

18 186 Land off Carcroft and Mixed in strength:: The Proposed Green 1 1 0 3 4 1 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Crabgate Skellow 186 Belt boundary would be defined by an Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site would perform in a largely inclusion within Lane, Skellow agricultural field boundary in the north, similar manner to the wider General Area. The Proposed Site is not further Site Selection which is considered to be a weakly-defined considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, work: Mixed in and not likely to be permanent feature. nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, and the Strength Boundary and Boundaries to the east and west would be Site is considered to have only a moderate role in assisting in urban Moderately Performing strongly defined by the A1(M) and regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban Crabgate Lane. The Proposed Green Belt land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a less boundary would therefore be mixed in essential gap between Skellow and Burghwallis. strength, however the Resultant Green Belt boundary would create a natural rounding off to the built form of Carcroft and Skellow. 29 273 Askern Road, Carcroft and Weak: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 1 0 3 4 1 1 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Carcroft Skellow 273 would be defined by a field boundary, an Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site would perform in a largely for inclusion within indented area defined by a shallow field similar manner to the wider General Area. The Proposed Site is not further Site Selection drain and a further field boundary. Proposed considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, work: Weak Boundary Green Belt boundaries are therefore nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, and the but Moderately considered to be weak. Whilst the resultant Site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban Performing Green Belt boundary would round-off the regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban angularity of the existing Green Belt land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a less boundary, the resultant boundary would be essential gap between Carcroft and Owston. However, the area within the of equal strength to what already exists. Proposed Site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment: the area contains land which is of moderate sensitivity to encroachment, and whilst the area contains no built form, high levels of containment reduce the perception of the area being ‘unspoilt’. 2 40 Land at Conisbrough Strong: The Proposed Green Belt Site is 1 1 5 3 4 2 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong 040 defined almost exactly by the parameters of Purpose: Although the Proposed Green Belt site and the existing Green Case for inclusion Road/Old Conisbrough 6 General Area, however the Belt boundary does have a strong role in preventing ribbon development, within further Site Road, Hilltop, settlement of Hill Top is excluded from the the Proposed Green Belt site is not connected to a large built up area, Selection work: Strong Conisbrough Proposed Site. If the Proposed Green Belt would have a limited impact on the historic core of Conisbrough and Boundary and site was removed from the Green Belt, the would have a moderate role in directing development towards Brownfield Moderately Performing resultant Green Belt boundary would be and Derelict land. Whilst release of the Proposed Green Belt site would defined in the south of the site by the still maintain the wide, strategic, but largely essential gap between A630/Sheffield Road and to the west by Conisbrough and the Urban Area of Rotherham and less essential gap Old Road, which is also the extent of the between the smaller outlying settlements of Hooton Pagnall and Hooton Doncaster Metropolitan Borough boundary. Roberts, release of this Green Belt land would result in coalescence with The resultant Green Belt boundary would the ‘washed over’ of Hill Top. Green Belt land at this location has be strong as this road is a recognisable, a moderately strong sensitivity to encroachment. durable and likely to be permanent boundary feature. 10 142 Land South of Conisbrough Weak: Following release of the Proposed 1 1 0 4 3 4 2 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Sheffield 142 Green Belt site, the resultant Green Belt Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed for inclusion within Road, boundary would be defined by the against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the further Site Selection Conisbrough following features: in the south by the Proposed Green Belt Site does not have a role in checking the unrestricted work: Weak Boundary private road of Spring Bank Road; in the sprawl of large built up areas and a weak role in preventing neighbouring but Moderately south west by a field boundary with towns from merging, the Green Belt at this location does have a moderate Performing

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 7 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

somewhat weakly defined and gappy role in assisting in urban regeneration. Most prominently, the Proposed hedgerow; in the north west by Park Lane, Green Belt Site is only considered to be separated from the Historic Core and in the east by extent of the Conisbrough of Conisbrough (that defined by Providence Place and Clifton View) by Cemetery. The resultant Green Belt only a natural boundary (woodland to the rear of the Providence Place). boundaries are predominantly weak, and The Site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in safeguarding particularly weak in the south west. The the countryside from encroachment. The Green Belt at this site also Resultant Green Belt boundary would contains features which are considered to be moderate-high sensitivity to therefore be created by a weakly indented development. area of built form which extends to the south of Sheffield Road. 23 221 Garage off Conisbrough Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 1 0 4 2 4 4 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Sheffield 221 Belt boundary would be created by a Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed inclusion within Road / Clifton densely wooded corridor of trees to the against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the further Site Selection Hill, south and south east. To the north east, the Proposed Green Belt Site does not have a role in checking the unrestricted work: Mixed in Conisbrough Green Belt boundary is weakly defined by sprawl of large built up areas and a weak role in preventing neighbouring (Site B) Strength Boundary and no physical infrastructure or natural towns from merging, the Green Belt at this location does have a moderate Moderately Performing boundary, and instead is likely to be the role in assisting in urban regeneration. Most prominently, the Proposed extent of an area of landownership. The Green Belt Site is only considered to be separated from the Historic Core Proposed Green Belt boundary is therefore of Conisbrough by Sheffield Road and existing built from, and therefore created by features which are mixed in the Site is considered to have a relatively strong role in preserving the strength: strong to the south and south east setting of the Historic Town of Conisbrough. The Proposed Green Belt and weak to the north. The Resultant Green Site has a mixed sensitivity to encroachment: high in the south and south Belt boundary would be created by an west and low in the north east, whereby overall, the Proposed Green Belt angular area of built form which extends to Site is considered to have a moderately-strong role in assisting in the south of Conisbrough. Nonetheless, this safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. could bring boundary coherence to the existing built form which is inset within the Green Belt to the south of Sheffield Road. 47 825 Fields off Conisbrough Weak: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 3 3 3 5 2 2 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Drake Head 825 would be created by weakly defined field Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt Site has a mixed role when assessed for inclusion within Lane, boundaries in the north, north west, east and against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the further Site Selection Conisbrough south east. Proposed Green Belt boundaries Proposed Green Belt Site does not have a role in checking the unrestricted work: Weak Boundary are therefore considered to be relatively sprawl of large built up areas, the Green Belt at this location does have a but Moderately weak. Given the nature of the Proposed moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration and a moderate role in Performing Green Belt site, the Resultant Green Belt preventing neighbouring towns from merging. Whilst the Proposed Green boundary at this location would create an Belt Site is considered to be separated from the Historic Core by post- isolated area of Green Belt to the rear of WWII development, views to the historic core are likely to be constrained Drake Head Lane in the north west, which and channelled. Owing to no built form within the area and the relative would perforate the designation. The isolation from the extent of existing built form of Conisbrough, the Resultant Green Belt boundary is therefore Proposed Green Belt is considered to have a moderate – strong role in also considered to be weak. safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 8 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

48 826 Field off Conisbrough Strong: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 3 3 4 4 2 3 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong Clifton Hill, 826 would be created by the strongly defined Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed Case for inclusion Conisbrough Clifton Hill in the south west and former against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the within further Site dismantled railway line, which is now Proposed Green Belt Site does not have a role in checking the unrestricted Selection work: Strong supported by low-lying vegetation, an sprawl of large built up areas and a weak role in preventing neighbouring Boundary and embankment feature and residential built towns from merging, the Green Belt at this location does have a moderate Moderately Performing form to the south. The Proposed Green Belt role in assisting in urban regeneration. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt boundaries are therefore considered to be Site is considered to be separated from the Historic Core by post-WWII mixed, but predominantly strong. Should development, there are views to the Historic Core which are only limited the Proposed Green Belt site be released, by medium-scale detractors. The Green Belt at this location is considered the Resultant Green Belt boundary would to have a moderate-strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside be strongly by the Dismantled Railway from encroachment. supported by the existing extent of residential built form in the north. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would be linear, recognisable and likely to be permanent. 27 251 Hill Top Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 1 0 3 4 3 1 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Road, Denaby 251 Belt site would be defined to the west by Purpose: The Proposed Green Belt Site has a moderate role when inclusion within Main Denaby Wood, to the south by the assessed against the Local Interpretation of Green Belt Purposes. Whilst further Site Selection Doncaster Green Belt boundary which is the Proposed Site only has a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl work: Mixed in supported by a corridor of mature trees, and of a large built up area and makes no discernable contribution to Strength Boundary and the Hill Top Road and a weakly defined preventing neighbouring towns from merging, the Green Belt at this Moderately Performing field boundary in the east. The Proposed location does have a moderately-strong role in assisting in safeguarding Green Belt Site is therefore considered to be the countryside from encroachment and a moderately-weak role in strongly defined, recognisable and likely to preserving the setting of a Historic Town. Green Belt land at this location be permanent in the west and south, and does have a relatively strong role in encouraging the recycling of derelict weaker in the east. and other urban land in Denaby. 1 33 Land adj. 163 Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 4 1 0 3 4 2 1 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Sheffield Main Urban Belt site was removed from the Green Belt, Purpose: Although the Proposed Green Belt site and the existing Green inclusion within Road, Area 033 the Resultant Green Belt boundary would Belt boundary does have a strong role in preventing ribbon development, further Site Selection Warmsworth be defined to the north by the strongly the Proposed Green Belt site is largely contiguous with the large built up work: Mixed in defined, recognisable and likely to be area of Doncaster (which is a regeneration priority area) and has a Strength Boundary and permanent A630/Sheffield Road; and to the relatively modest role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging, as Moderately Performing west by weakly defined field boundary, there would still be a largely essential gap between Conisbrough and denoted only by the change in agricultural Warmsworth. The Proposed Green Belt site would have very limited crop and no other recognisable or likely to impact on the historic core of Warmsworth, which forms part of the be permanent features. The resultant Green Historic Town of Doncaster. The Proposed Green Belt is considered to Belt boundaries would therefore be mixed have a moderate – strong role in safeguarding the countryside from in strength with the northern boundary encroachment. performing as a recognisable, durable and likely to be permanent feature and the western boundary performing as a feature lacking durability and is not readily recognisable.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 9 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

4 79 Land at Doncaster Weak: The Proposed Green Belt Site 4 0 3 3 4 3 2 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Melton Road, Main Urban boundaries are defined to the south and Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed for inclusion within Sprotbrough Area 079 west by the weakly-defined Ings Lane against the local interpretation of the Purposes. The Proposed Site is further Site Selection which tapers to an informal footpath, and to considered to be contiguous with the ‘Large Built-up Area of Doncaster’ work: Weak Boundary the south east by a weakly defined field and therefore could check the unrestricted sprawl, as well as supporting but Moderately boundary and footpath. The Resultant the urban regeneration of the Main Urban Area. Whilst the Green Belt Performing Green Belt Boundary is therefore land to the west of the Proposed Green Belt site could be considered to considered to be weak and predominantly support the ‘essential land gap’ between neighbouring towns, the land gap created by features lacking in durability. at this location has been degraded somewhat by the presence of four residential dwellings along Melton Road. This separation is therefore created by the land to the west of the four residential dwellings and the Proposed Green Belt Site makes no discernable contribution to physical or perceptual separation. The Proposed Green Belt site has a moderate role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town and it is considered to contain features which are of low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment. 6 115 Alverley Doncaster Strong: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 4 0 0 2 3 2 1 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong Lane, Balby Main Urban would be defined by a densely vegetated Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site is highly contained within the Case for inclusion Area 115 dismantled railway corridor to the south. existing built form of Doncaster and is considered to have a moderately within further Site The Proposed Green Belt boundary is strong role in assisting in urban regeneration. Given the strength of the Selection work: Strong therefore considered to be strongly defined, proposed boundary, there are no views towards settlements in the south Boundary and recognisable and likely to be permanent. and therefore the Green Belt within the Proposed Site makes no Moderately Performing The Resultant Green Belt boundary would discernable role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. Similar result in a rounding of the existing built to the wider General Area, the Proposed Green Belt Site has a relatively form. weak role in preserving the setting of the historic core of the Main Urban Area of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location has a low-moderate role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. 7 122 Challenger Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 4 0 0 4 4 4 4 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Drive, Main Urban Belt boundary at this location would be Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site has a moderately-strong role inclusion within Sprotbrough Area 122 defined by a strongly defined wooded when assessed against the local interpretation of the Purposes. The further Site Selection corridor in the north, and weakly defined Proposed Site is considered to be contiguous with the ‘large built up area work: Mixed in field boundaries in the south and west of Doncaster’ and therefore could check the unrestricted sprawl, as well as Strength Boundary and which are not strongly recognisable nor supporting the urban regeneration of the Main Urban Area. The Proposed Moderately Performing likely to be permanent. The Proposed Green Green Belt site makes no discernable contribution to preventing Belt boundaries are therefore mixed in neighbouring towns from merging. Owing to its proximity to the Historic strength: stronger in the north and weaker in Town Core features (associated with Hall), the Proposed Green the west. The Resultant Green Belt Belt Site is considered to have a moderately strong role in preserving the Boundary is therefore considered to be setting of Historic Town features, and the proximity to the Registered Mixed in Strength, and a boundary which Park and Garden does mean the Site has a role in safeguarding the would retain an angular and weakly defined countryside from encroachment. Further heritage impact assessment work built form boundary. would need to be done to determine the impact of development at this location on the setting of .

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 10 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

45 161 Mill Farm, Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 4 0 0 3 2 4 3 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Mill Gate, Main Urban Belt boundary at this location would be Purpose: The Proposed Green Belt site would have a mixed role when inclusion within Bentley Area 161 defined by Fowler Bridge Road supported assessed against local interpretation of the Green Belt purposes. The further Site Selection by Fowler Bridge Drain and a corridor of Proposed Green Belt site would have a moderately strong role in checking work: Mixed in trees in the east, which in combination, the unrestricted sprawl of the large built up area, no role in preventing Strength Boundary and forms a relatively strongly defined and neighbouring towns from merging as the Green Belt at this point generally Moderately Performing recognisable boundary. Bentley Town drain only provides separation between of Urban Doncaster forms the southern boundary which is and a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration. The weakly defined and not recognisable in part. Proposed Green Belt site has a moderately strong role in preserving the The western boundary would be defined by setting of the historic core of Doncaster, as defined on the 1st edition 6 a strongly defined dense copse of inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854), however views woodland, which decreases rapidly in are impacted by low-lying moderate scale detractors. The Green Belt at strength to a weakly defined field boundary this location has a moderate role in safeguarding features of the in the north. The Proposed Green Belt countryside from encroachment. boundary would be Mixed in Strength: strong in the east and south west, weak in the south and north west. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would result in a weakly-defined angular area of built form which extends to the south of Bentley. 19 212 Lords Head Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 3 3 0 3 4 2 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Lane, Main Urban Belt boundaries would therefore be formed Purpose: The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed inclusion within Warmsworth Area 212 by a strongly defined dismantled railway against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The Green further Site Selection line in the south, the extent of the Belt at this location has a moderate role in checking the unrestricted work: Mixed in Warmsworth Beck WwTW in the south sprawl of the large built up area of Doncaster, a relatively strong role in Strength Boundary and east, Warmsworth Beck in the north east assisting in urban regeneration and a mixed role in preventing Moderately Performing and a heavily wooded dismantled railway neighbouring towns from merging. The Proposed Green Belt site would line in the north and a field boundary to the have a limited impact on the historic core of Warmsworth, which forms west of Lord’s Head Lane. The Proposed part of the Historic Town of Doncaster. The Site is considered to contain Green Belt boundaries are therefore mixed features which are of moderate sensitivity to encroachment and therefore, in strength: strong in the west defined by the Green Belt at this location is considered to have a moderate role in Edlington Lane, strong in the south and safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. north defined by a dismantled railway line, with weaker boundaries defined by a field boundary and the Warmsworth Beck which is only weakly supported by low-lying shrubby vegetation. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would create an indented and angular area of built form, with an inconsistent eastern boundary. If released, the Proposed Site would result in two areas of Green Belt designated land between Edlington Lane and Lord’s Head Lane which would perforate the Green Belt.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 11 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

21 214 Common Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 3 5 3 3 4 2 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Lane, Main Urban Belt boundaries would be weakly defined in Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed inclusion within Warmsworth Area 214 the west by Warmsworth Beck, which is a against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The Green further Site Selection shallow field drain with only moderate Belt at this location has a moderate role in checking the unrestricted work: Mixed in scale vegetation to support this feature; the sprawl of the large built up area of Doncaster and a moderate role in Strength Boundary and strongly defined A1(M) in the east; the assisting in urban regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt site would have Moderately Performing strongly defined dismantled railway line a limited impact on the historic core of Warmsworth, which forms part of and Broomhouse Lane in the south, and the the Historic Town of Doncaster. Development of the full extent of the extent of the Warmsworth WwTW in the Proposed Green Belt Site would result in full coalescence between New west. The Proposed Green Belt boundaries Edlington and the Main Urban Area of Doncaster. The Proposed Green are considered to be mixed in strength: Belt site therefore falls within an essential gap, where development strong in the east and south, and weaker in particularly beyond the residential dwellings at the convergence between the west. In isolation, release of Green Belt Broomhouse Lane, Common Lane and Grange Land would result in land from this location would result in an coalescence between Balby and . The Proposed Green Belt indented and angular area of residential Site is considered to have a moderate role in safeguarding the countryside built form which would be largely isolated from encroachment. from any settlement. 22 217 Back Lane, Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 3 3 0 5 5 3 4 3 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Cusworth Main Urban Belt boundary would comprise Long Purposes (Purpose 3 and 4): The Proposed Green Belt site has a strong for inclusion within Area 217 Plantation in the north which is a densely role when assessed against the local interpretation of the Purposes. The further Site Selection wooded corridor of trees, Spring Rein wood Proposed Site is considered to be connected with the ‘large built up area work: Mixed in in the north west and Back Lane in the of Doncaster’ and therefore could check the unrestricted sprawl, as well as Strength Boundary but south. The Proposed Green Belt boundary supporting the urban regeneration of the Main Urban Area. The Proposed Strongly Performing features are therefore considered to be Green Belt site makes no discernable contribution to preventing relatively strong, however, the Resultant neighbouring towns from merging. However, the Proposed Green Belt site Green Belt boundary would represent a is considered to have a strong role in safeguarding the countryside from stepped and angular area of residential built encroachment and a moderately-strong role in preserving the setting and form. special character of a Historic Core. 24 234 Broad Axe, Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 4 0 0 4 4 2 3 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Main Urban Belt boundary would be defined by the Purposes: Based on the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the inclusion within Area 234 in the south west, and a Proposed Green Belt Site would therefore have a moderately strong role further Site Selection boundary which is not based on any in checking the unrestricted sprawl of the Urban Area of Doncaster and a work: Mixed in infrastructure or natural features on the moderate strong role in assisting in urban regeneration. Given the extent Strength Boundary and ground in the north west. Given the Roman of the built form of Scawthorpe in the north, the Proposed Green Belt site Moderately Performing Ridge is visible within the built form of is not considered to make any discernable contribution to separation. The Bentley to the south east, this boundary is Proposed Green Belt contains no built form, but is considered to contain considered to be a permanent and features which have a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. Despite recognisable feature. The Proposed Green the presence of the roman ridge (which would require further assessment Belt boundary is therefore considered to be work to determine the impact) the Site has a limited role in preserving the mixed in strength: very strong in the south setting and special character of a historic town. west and north east, and weak in the west. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore result in a natural rounding off of the existing built form of Bawtry and Scawthorpe.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 12 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

25 237 Warmsworth Doncaster Strong: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 3 3 0 4 1 2 1 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong Quarry, Main Urban would be defined by the full extent of Purposes: Green Belt Site performs moderately on Purpose 1, Purpose 3 Case for inclusion Sheffield Area 237 Warmsworth Quarry which would represent and Purpose 5: The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to perform in within further Site Road, a prominent physical feature. However, to largely the same way as the General Area. The Green Belt Site has a Selection work: Strong Warmsworth the north of the site, the Proposed Green moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area (2) Boundary and Belt boundary sharply indents around a and a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. Land at this Moderately Performing copse of woodland. Whilst the woodland is location maintains a largely essential gap between Urban Doncaster and still considered to be a strongly defined Conisbrough, and therefore, the Proposed Green Belt Site has a moderate feature, the protruding nature of this role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The Green Belt at woodland does reduce the overall strength this location has a moderately weak role in preserving the setting of a of the boundary. historic town and a mixed role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. 26 246 Scawthorpe Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 4 0 0 1 1 2 3 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Reservoir, Main Urban Belt boundary would be defined by the Purposes: Based on the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the inclusion within Green Lane Area 246 extent of the Scawthorpe Reservoir, which Proposed Green Belt Site would therefore have a moderately strong role further Site Selection is delineated by neighbouring agricultural in checking the unrestricted sprawl of the Urban Area of Doncaster and a work: Mixed in fields by a fence. The Proposed Green Belt moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration. Given the Strength Boundary and boundary features are therefore considered extent of the built form of Scawthorpe in the north, the Proposed Green Moderately Performing to be weak. However, release of the land Belt site is not considered to make any discernable contribution to within the Proposed Site would result in separation. Given the Scawthorpe Reservoir exists on the site, there area relatively stronger and more coherent has a moderately urban character and a very weak role in safeguarding the Resultant Green Belt boundary. countryside from encroachment. In addition, as Scawthorpe Farm has been completely redeveloped as Charter Drive and The Sycamore, this area is considered to have only a limited role in forming part of the Complex Historic Core of Doncaster. 33 436 Land at Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 3 0 3 4 4 2 3 3 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Lane Main Urban Belt boundary would be strongly defined in Purposes: Based on the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the inclusion within Area 436 the south and west by Barnsley Road and Proposed Green Belt Site would therefore have a moderate role in further Site Selection Scawsby Lane, a weakly defined field checking the unrestricted sprawl of the Urban Area of Doncaster and a work: Mixed in boundary in the north and a Roman Ridge moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. Given the extent of the Strength Boundary and in the north east. Given the Roman Ridge is built form of Scawthorpe in the north, the Proposed Green Belt site is not Moderately Performing visible within the built form of Bentley to considered to make any discernable contribution to separation. Owing to the south east, this boundary is considered minimal levels of built form and rare features along Barnsley Lane, the to be a permanent and recognisable feature. Green Belt land within the Proposed Site does have a moderately strong In isolation, the Resultant Green Belt role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and a boundary would therefore be mixed in moderate role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic strength: strongly defined in the south, west town. and the north east by Barnsley Road, Scawsby Lane and the Roman Road, and weak in the north. However, the Resultant Green Belt boundary could be considered as an extension of Bentley that mirrors the northern extent of the built form of Scawthorpe.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 13 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

39 494 Green Lane, Doncaster Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 4 0 0 4 4 2 3 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for Scawthorpe Main Urban Belt boundary would be strongly defined by Purposes: Based on the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the inclusion within Area 494 Green Lane in the north, the Roman Ridge Proposed Green Belt Site would therefore have a moderately strong role further Site Selection in the west and a boundary which is not in checking the unrestricted sprawl of the Urban Area of Doncaster and a work: Mixed in based on any infrastructure or natural moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration. Given the extent Strength Boundary and features on the ground in the south east. of the built form of Scawthorpe in the north, the Proposed Green Belt site Moderately Performing Given the Roman Ridge is visible within is not considered to make any discernable contribution to separation. the built form of Bentley to the south east, Owing to the minimal levels of built form, levels of containment and this boundary is considered to be a mixed sensitivity to encroachment, the Proposed Green Belt Site is permanent and recognisable feature. The considered to have a moderate-high role in safeguarding the countryside Proposed Green Belt boundary is therefore from encroachment. Whilst Scawthorpe Farm existed on the 1st edition 6 considered to be mixed in strength: strong inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854), this area has now in the south and west, and weak in the east. been redeveloped for housing. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore In isolation, the Resultant Green Belt considered to have a relatively weak role in preserving the setting and boundary would result in an angular area of special character of a historic town core. Further heritage impact built form which would also create an area assessment work would need to be undertaken to determine the impact on to the south that perforates the Green Belt. the Roman Road of releasing the Proposed Green Belt Site. In isolation, the Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore be mixed in strength. 8 139 Land North of Mexborough Weak: The proposed Green Belt Boundary 1 5 5 3 4 3 1 4 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for Wath Road, 139 would be defined by Wath Road in the Purposes (Purpose 2): The Proposed Green Belt Site performs in largely inclusion within Mexborough south west, a field boundary in the west, a the same manner as the Green Belt General Area. Green Belt at this further Site Selection field boundary supported by occasional location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is work: Weak Boundary mature trees in the north west and a weakly not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a and Strongly defined field boundary in the north east. Large Built Up Area. However, the General Area is considered to have a Performing Aside from the A6023 which accounts for a strong role in preventing the neighbouring towns of very small proportion of the outer and Mexborough from the merging, and a moderately strong role in boundary, the Proposed Green Belt encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Proposed boundary is considered to be weakly Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderate role in safeguarding the defined, weakly recognisable and unlikely countryside from encroachment and weak role in preserving the setting to be permanent. and special character of historic towns. 14 154 Land to the Mexborough Weak: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 1 0 3 5 3 1 4 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case North West of 154 would be defined by a weakly defined Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt Site performs in largely the same for inclusion within Pastures Road boundary which extends beyond Ullswater manner as the Green Belt General Area. Green Belt at this location is further Site Selection Road and towards the employment therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not work: Weak Boundary allocation. This boundary is not based on considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large but Moderately any natural or physical infrastructure Built Up Area. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a Performing features on the ground. Whilst the Resultant limited role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and a Green Belt Site would represent a natural moderately weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a rounding off of built form, the Proposed historic town. The Green Belt within the Proposed Site has a mixed role in Green Belt Site is considered to be weakly safeguarding the countryside form encroachment: the area closest to the defined, not recognisable and not likely to built form has a weak role in safeguarding the countryside, whilst the area be permanent. to the north east is considered to display a strong unspoilt character. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderately high role in encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 14 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

20 213 Mill Lane, Sprotbrough Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 3 5 5 4 4 2 1 3 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Warmsworth 213 Belt Site boundary would be defined by Purposes (Purpose 2 and 3): The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered for inclusion within Mill Lane to the south west, which is a to perform in largely the same way as the General Area. The Green Belt further Site Selection strongly defined boundary feature, a copse Site has a moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large work: Mixed in of woodland in the north west which is a built up area and a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. Land Strength Boundary but strong defined and likely to be permanent at this location maintains an essential gap between Urban Doncaster and Strongly Performing feature, a weakly defined field boundary in Sprotbrough, and the extent to which the Green Belt support this Purpose the north and the strongly-defined River decreases in strength further to the north. The Proposed Green Belt Site Don boundary in the far north. The has a moderately-strong role in safeguarding the countryside from boundary in the far east is weakly defined encroachment and the Green Belt at this location has only a moderately by a field boundary and the extent of the weak role in preserving the setting of a historic town and a mixed role in Warmsworth Cemetery. The Proposed safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be Mixed in Strength: strong in the south west, strong in the far north and weakly defined intermittent boundaries elsewhere. 28 252 Spring Lane, Sprotbrough Weak: The Proposed Green Belt 1 3 0 3 5 1 1 1 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Sprotbrough 252 boundaries would be defined by weakly Purpose: The Proposed Green Belt site has a weak role in checking the for inclusion within defined field boundaries in the north and unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a weak role in assisting in further Site Selection west. The proposed Green Belt boundaries urban regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt site has a moderate role in work: Weak Boundary are weakly defined and unlikely to be supporting a land gap between settlements and a weak role in preserving but Moderately durable. the setting and special character of a historic town. The Green Belt at this Performing location is considered to have a moderately-strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside form encroachment.

44 788 Land at Sprotbrough Weak: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 3 3 2 4 2 2 1 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Sprotbrough 788 would be defined by a weak field boundary Purpose: The Proposed Green Belt site has a weak role in checking the for inclusion within in the west, the A1(M) in the north east, a unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a weak role in assisting in further Site Selection weak field boundary in the south east and urban regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role in work: Weak Boundary an indented area of built form. The supporting a land gap between settlements, a moderately weak role in but Moderately proposed Green Belt boundaries are weakly safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and a moderately weak Performing defined, and the release of the Proposed role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. Site would result in a weakly defined, angular area of residential built form along Melton Road

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 15 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

49 872 Land at Sprotbrough Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 3 5 3 5 1 1 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Melton Road, 872 Belt boundary would therefore be defined Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in checking the for inclusion within Sprotbrough to the north by Toecroft Lane which is a unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, a weak role in assisting in further Site Selection private access track to the north of the urban regeneration and a weak role in preserving the setting and special work: Mixed in Proposed Site, the strongly defined Melton character of a historic town. The Proposed Green Belt site would support Strength Boundary but Road to the south of the site, and a weakly a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The Strongly Performing defined field boundary to the west of the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of Proposed Site. The Proposed Green Belt moderate sensitivity to encroachment, and no built form, and therefore the Boundary is considered to be Mixed in Green Belt at this location has a role in assisting in safeguarding the Strength: strongly defined in the south; countryside from encroachment. weakly defined and weakly recognisable in the west and formed by a private track road in the north which is unlikely to be durable in the long term. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would be created by features that are mixed in strength, and which would result in an irregular protrusion of built form to the west of Sprotbrough 5 109 Land off Tickhill 109 Mixed in Strength: The Proposed Green 1 3 5 2 4 4 5 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Belt Site boundaries are formed by a field Purposes (Purpose 4): The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in for inclusion within Street, boundary with a sparse and gappy tree line a similar manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. Again the further Site Selection Tickhill and hedgerow in the west, the shallow Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which work: Mixed in drainage ditch of Paper Mill Dike in the the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, and Strength Boundary but south west and an informal footpath in the weakly when assessed for the extent to which the Green Belt assists in Strongly Performing south. The boundary to the east would be supporting regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a strongly defined by the A1(M). Whilst the largely essential land gap between Haworth and Tickhill where A1(M) represents a strongly defined and the overall scale and openness of the gap is important to maintaining durable feature, Proposed Green Belt separation, however where some development is possible. The Proposed boundaries predominantly lack durability in Green Belt Site is considered to contain land which has a moderate-low the south and west, and are not readily sensitivity to encroachment, and the Site is considered to display a Strong recognisable. In addition, the Resultant Rural Character. Because of the linear nature of the Proposed Green Belt Green Belt boundary in isolation would site, the Site offers spreading and expansive views towards the historic create an extended area of residential built core of Tickhill from the south of the Site. form which would result in a weakly indented and irregular boundary.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 16 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

30 281 Land off Tickhill 281 Weak: The Proposed Green Belt site 1 1 0 2 3 2 3 1 Weakly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for boundaries comprise the well-defined and Purposes: The Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the inclusion within Road, Tickhill likely to be permanent Worksop Road in the extent to which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large- further Site Selection west, a tree-boundary in the south and to the built up area, and the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting work: Weak Boundary east by an irregularly drawn boundary regeneration. However, because neighbouring settlements to the south of Strength Boundary but linked to no natural or infrastructure the site do not have a housing requirement and are small in scale, the Weakly Performing features. The Resultant Green Belt Proposed Green Belt site has a weak role in preventing neighbouring boundary would therefore result in a towns from merging. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to stepped and angular area of built form. The contain features which have a low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment, future Resultant Boundary is therefore and this Site has a moderately-strong rural character. The Proposed Green considered to be somewhat weak. Belt site is separated from the historic core of Tickhill by a natural boundary, the infrastructure boundary of Lindrick Road and post WWII The proposed Green Belt boundary is development and therefore the Green Belt site has a relatively weak to therefore considered to be mixed in moderate role in preserving the setting of the Historic Town of Tickhill. strength, strong in the west and south, and weak in the east. The Resultant Boundary would result in a stepped and angular area of built form to the south of Tickhill. 31 356 Land off Tickhill 356 Weak: The Proposed Green Belt site 1 3 0 4 5 4 5 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for Lindrick Lane, boundaries comprise the well-defined Purposes (Purpose 3 and 4): The Proposed Green Belt site largely inclusion within Tickhill Lindrick Lane in the north west, which is performs in a similar manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. Again further Site Selection supported by a corridor of trees; to the the Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the extent to work: Weak Boundary south, by an irregular boundary linked to no which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up and Strongly natural or infrastructure features and to the area, and the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting Performing west by Water Lane which is a private regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a largely essential access track that may not be permanent in land gap between Haworth Bircotes and Tickhill where the overall scale the long-term. Whilst Lindrick Lane would and openness of the gap is important to maintaining separation, however represent a strongly defined boundary, where some development is possible. The Proposed Green Belt Site is proposed Site boundaries to the south and considered to contain features which are of moderately-high sensitivity to east of the site are weak with the southern encroachment, which have not been encroached upon; the Green Belt Site boundary not considered to be recognisable therefore displays a Strong Unspoilt Rural Character. Because of the nor likely to be permanent. extent of the Proposed Green Belt site, the Site offers views to the historic core of Tickhill and therefore the proposed site is considered to have a strong role in preserving the setting and special character of the historic town of Tickhill. 32 357 Land off Tickhill 357 Weak: The proposed Green Belt boundary 1 1 0 3 5 2 1 1 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case Wong Lane, would be defined by Greystone Lane, which Purposes: The Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the for inclusion within Tickhill is a private access track connecting to fields extent to which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large- further Site Selection beyond the railway line in the north; and built up area, and the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting work: Weak Boundary weakly defined field boundaries in the north regeneration The Proposed Green Belt Boundary also has a relatively but Moderately west and west. The Proposed Green Belt weak in supporting a land gap between settlements and providing the Performing boundaries are therefore weak. Removing setting to Historic Core of Tickhill. Whilst the southern part of the the Proposed Green Belt site from the General Area is considered to have a moderate role in safeguarding the Green Belt would therefore result in an countryside from encroachment, the Site does not contain any built form angular area of residential built form to the and therefore displays a Strong Unspoilt Rural Character. north of Tickhill, which is weaker than the existing Green Belt boundary.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 17 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

34 452 Land West of Tickhill 452 Mixed in Strength : The Proposed Green 1 1 0 3 3 3 2 1 Weakly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong Dadsley Road, Belt boundaries associated with the site Purposes: The Proposed Site performs relatively weakly when assessed Case for inclusion Tickhill would be defined by Dadsley Road in the against the extent to which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl within further Site east; a relatively-weak field boundary of a large built up area, and has a weak role in preventing neighbouring Selection work: Mixed supported by a number of larger shrubs in towns from merging or assisting in urban regeneration. The Proposed in Strength Boundary the north and south; and Peastack Lane, Green Belt Site is considered to contain land which is of low-moderate and Weakly which is an adopted road as defined by sensitivity to change, and this location has seen moderate levels of Performing DMBC is in the west. The Proposed Green encroachment. The Site displays a Moderately Strong Rural character. Belt Boundaries are therefore considered to Whilst the Green Belt within the proposed site boundary is considered to be mixed in strength; strong in the east and be separated from the built form of Tickhill by post WWII development, west and weak in the north and south. there are channelled and constrained views towards historic elements of the core of Tickhill. Removing the Proposed Green Belt site from the Green Belt would therefore result in an angular area of residential built form to the north east of Tickhill, which would also result in an area of undeveloped land to the north of Dadsley Court. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore be angular and indented area of built form, and represent a weak Green Belt boundary which is unlikely to be permanent in the long-term. 46 824 Land behind Tickhill 824 Weak: The Proposed Green Belt site 1 3 0 3 4 4 5 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for Lumley Drive, boundary is defined by a number of Purposes (Purpose 4): The Proposed Site performs weakly when inclusion within Tickhill agricultural buildings in the north west; a assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted further Site Selection weakly defined field boundary in the west sprawl of a large-built up area, and the extent to which the Green Belt work: Weak Boundary which is only delineated by occasional low- assists in supporting regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt Site falls and Strongly lying scrubby hedges; the Paper Mill Dike within a largely essential land gap between Haworth Bircotes and Tickhill Performing in the south which is lined with trees to the where the overall scale and openness of the gap is important to south west and which is a less-defined maintaining separation, however where some development is possible. shallow drainage ditch in the central eastern The Site contains features which are considered to display moderate- portion; and the boundary to the east is sensitivity to development and a strong rural character. Because of the defined by a weakly defined field boundary. extent of the Proposed Green Belt site, the Site offers views to the historic The Proposed Green Belt boundaries are core of Tickhill and therefore the proposed site is considered to have a therefore considered to be mixed in strong role in preserving the setting and special character of the historic strength: stronger to the south, but town of Tickhill. predominantly weak to the west, south east and east.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 18 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

52 875 Site A, Land Tickhill 875 Weak: The Proposed Green Belt Boundary 1 1 0 2 4 2 2 1 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case to East of would therefore be defined by relatively Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in a similar for inclusion within Doncaster dense copse of woods in the north manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. Again, the Proposed Site further Site Selection Road, Tickhill supported by the Dadsley Well Stream, a performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt work: Weak Boundary private track associated with Eastfield Farm checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, the extent to which but Moderately in the south and a weakly defined field the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration and the role which the Performing boundary in the east. The Proposed Green Green Belt has in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. Whilst Belt boundary is therefore considered to be the Proposed Green Belt site contains no built form, it is not considered to predominantly weak; whilst the Proposed be ‘unspoilt’; indeed, the Site is considered to have a low-moderate Green Belt boundary would be sensitivity to development. The Proposed Green Belt General Area has a predominantly strong in the north and weak relatively weak role in preserving the setting and special character of in the south and west. Tickhill. 53 876 Site B, Land Tickhill 876 Weak: The Proposed Green Belt Site 1 1 0 2 3 2 1 1 Weakly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for to East of boundary comprises a private track road Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in a similar inclusion within Doncaster associated with Eastfield Farm in the north manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. Again the Proposed Site further Site Selection Road, Tickhill and an irregularly drawn boundary which performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt work: Weak Boundary would not be identified by physical features checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, the extent to which Strength Boundary but on the ground in the east. The Proposed the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration and the role which the Weakly Performing Green Belt boundary is therefore considered Green Belt has in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The to be weakly defined, not recognisable and Proposed Green Belt General Area has a relatively weak role in therefore, not likely to be permanent. preserving the setting and special character of Tickhill and a moderately weak role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. 54 877 Site C, Land Tickhill 877 Weak The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 1 0 2 4 2 1 1 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Weak Case to East of would be defined by the strongly defined Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in a similar for inclusion within Doncaster A1(M) in the east, a weakly defined manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. Again the Proposed Site further Site Selection Road, Tickhill boundary drawn using no physical features performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt work: Weak Boundary to the north and a weakly defined private checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, the extent to which but Moderately track to the west. Although the Green Belt the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration and the role which the Performing would result in an extension to the built Green Belt has in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. form of Tickhill, the Proposed Green Belt However, the Proposed Green Belt General Area has a relatively weak boundary features would therefore be role in preserving the setting and special character of Tickhill and a created by weakly defined boundary moderate role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. features. 55 880 Land at Tickhill 880 Weak: The Proposed Green Belt Site 1 3 0 3 4 4 5 1 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for Tickhill boundary is weakly defined in the south Purposes (Purpose 4): The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in inclusion within west and north east by a field boundary a similar manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. Again the further Site Selection with low-lying scrubby hedges. In the south Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which work: Weak Boundary and south east, the Proposed Green Belt site the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, and and Strongly boundary is defined by a shallow ditch (the weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt assists in Performing Paper Mill Dike) which is not always a supporting regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt Site maintains a largely physically recognisable feature. The essential land gap between Haworth Bircotes and Tickhill where the Proposed Green Belt boundary features are overall scale and openness of the gap is important to maintaining therefore weak and lacking in durability, separation, however where some development is possible. The Proposed with the strongest feature being the Paper Green Belt Site is considered to contain land which has a moderate Mill Dike in the central western area. In sensitivity to encroachment, and the Site is considered to display a Strong addition, the Resultant Green Belt boundary Rural Character. Because of the linear nature of the Proposed Green Belt in isolation would result in an angular area site, the Site offers views to the historic core of Tickhill and therefore the which extends to the south of the proposed site is considered to have a strong role in preserving the setting settlement; this would be a considerably and special character of the historic town of Tickhill.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 19 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proforma Ref

Report 2b Purpose 3b Purpose 4b Purpose Purpose 2a Purpose 4a Purpose Purpose3a Purpose 1 Purpose 5 Purpose

weak and angular Green Belt boundary which is unlikely to be permanent.

15 159 Land around Wadworth Weak: The Proposed Green Belt boundary 1 5 5 4 4 2 3 3 Strongly Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Weak Case for Wadworth 159 would be divided by the A60 in the north Purposes (Purpose 2 and 3): The Proposed Green Belt Site performs in inclusion within west. largely the same manner as South 3, South 4 and South 5 combined. further Site Selection Whilst the Green Belt at this location has a relatively weak role in work: Weak Boundary • Land to the west of Loversall is contained checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, release of the and Strongly by the A60, the A1(M) and the M18. The Proposed Site would result in coalescence of Rossington with the defined Performing Proposed Green Belt Boundary would villages of Loversall and Wadworth. The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore be very strongly defined by Green therefore assumes the whole of a land gap which would otherwise be Belt features, however the Resultant identified as an ‘essential’ gap. Green Belt at this location contains Boundary would create an angular area of features which are of a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment and has built form to the south west of Loversall a strong rural character: the Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore which is predominantly isolated and angular considered to display a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. and which does not have a functional Similar to the General Area, Green Belt at this location has a moderately relationship to a larger settlement. weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town and has only a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by • Land to the east of the A1(M) has a weak encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. overall boundary. The boundary to the north west would be defined by the strongly defined highway infrastructure of the A60 and the A1(M) in the west, and relatively strongly defined by the extent of the New Rossington Colliery supported by the drain in the east. However, in the north and south, the proposed Green Belt boundaries would be weakly defined: in the north the boundary is weakly defined by a field drain supported by low-lying vegetation which is not recognisable in the east, and in the south, the Green Belt boundary is defined by either a field boundary or in some cases, the boundary is defined by no natural or infrastructure boundary features. The boundaries to the east of the A1(M) are therefore considered to be predominantly weak, largely not recognisable in the north and south of the area and lacking in durability.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 20 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Annexed Sites May 2017 (not included in summery of Assessment Outcomes)

Ref in GIS Name Settlement Comments on Boundaries Appraised against Five Purposes View on Purposes Indicative Grading Proform Ref a Report 1 Purpose 2a Purpose 2b Purpose Purpose3a 3b Purpose 4a Purpose 4b Purpose 5 Purpose

56 930 Land Tickhill 930 Strong: The Proposed Green Belt site 1 1 0 3 4 2 3 1 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderately Strong Between boundaries comprise the well-defined and Purposes: The Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the Case for inclusion Lindrick likely to be permanent Worksop Road in extent to which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large- within further Site Lane and the west and the well-defined Lindrick Lane built up area, and the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting Selection work: Strong Worksop in the east. To the north west, the boundary regeneration. In addition, because neighbouring settlements to the south of Boundary and Road, indents around an area of open storage. The the site do not have a housing requirement and are small in scale, the Moderately Performing Tickhill boundaries of this area are weaker than the Proposed Green Belt site has a weak role in preventing neighbouring very strong Worksop Road and Lindrick towns from merging. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to Lane. The proposed Green Belt boundary is contain features which have a moderate sensitivity to encroachment, and therefore considered to be predominantly this Site has a moderately-strong rural character. The Proposed Green Belt strong in the east, south and west, and site is separated from the historic core of Tickhill by a natural boundary, somewhat weaker in the north west. the infrastructure boundary of Lindrick Road and post WWII development. Therefore the Green Belt site has a relatively weak to moderate role in preserving the setting of the Historic Town of Tickhill. A heritage impact assessment would be necessary to determine any site level impact on Historic Core. 57 929 Land North Sprotbrough Mixed in Strength: The proposed Green 1 3 5 3 4 1 1 1 Moderately Performs against Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Moderate Case for of Cadeby 929 Belt boundary would be defined by Melton Purposes: The Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in checking the inclusion within Road, Road to the north, and Cadeby Road to the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, a weak role in assisting in further Site Selection Sprotbrough south; both of which are considered to be urban regeneration and a weak role in preserving the setting and special work: Mixed in strongly defined features. However, to the character of a historic town. The Proposed Green Belt site would support Strength Boundary and west, the Proposed Green Belt boundary a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The Moderately Performing would be weakly defined by a field Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of boundary that is supported by low, gappy moderate sensitivity to encroachment and very limited levels of built hedgerows. On occasion, these boundaries form. Therefore the Green Belt at this location has a role in assisting in are broken, and often, the boundary is not safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. considered to be distinguishable. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would be created by features that are mixed in strength, strong in the north and south, with a weak boundary in the west.

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 21 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Green Belt Sites Re-appraisal

Appendix 2: Assessment Proformas

ISSUE | Issue | 9 May 2017 Page 1 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE- APPRAISAL_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Content 24 Conisbrough 826: Field off Clifton Hill, Conisbrough 70 Page 25 Denaby Main 251: Hill Top Road, Denaby Main 73 1 Adwick le Street 458: Land off Church Lane, Adwick 1 26 Doncaster Main Urban Area 033: Land adjacent 163 Sheffield Road, Warmsworth 2 Adwick le Street 459: Land off Doncaster Lane, Adwick 4 76 3 Adwick le Street 461: Redhouse Lane (a) North West, Adwick 7 27 Doncaster Main Urban Area 079: Land at Melton Road, Sprotbrough 79 4 Adwick le Street 462: Land off Adwick Lane, Carcroft 10 28 Doncaster Main Urban Area 115: Alverley Lane, Balby 82 5 Adwick le Street 512: Redhouse Lane (b) North East, Adwick 13 29 Doncaster Main Urban Area 122: Challenger Drive, Sprotbrough 85 6 Adwick le Street 513: Redhouse Lane (C) South, Adwick 16 30 Doncaster Main Urban Area 161: Mill Farm, Mill Gate, Bentley 88 7 Barnburgh and Harlington 143: Land north of Primary School, Church Lane, 31 Doncaster Main Urban Area 212: Lords Head Lane, Warmsworth 91 Barnburgh 19 32 Doncaster Main Urban Area 214: Common Lane, Warmsworth 94 8 Barnburgh and Harlington 777: ‘Plot 3’, Harlington 22 33 Doncaster Main Urban Area 217: Back Lane, Cusworth 97 9 Bawtry 141: Westwood Road, Bawtry 25 34 Doncaster Main Urban Area 234: Broad Axe, Scawthorpe 100 10 Bawtry 146: Tickhill Road, Bawtry 28 35 Doncaster Main Urban Area 237 Warmsworth Quarry, Sheffield Road, Warmsworth 11 Bawtry 786: South of Cockhill Close, Bawtry 31 (2) 103 12 Bawtry 873: Site A, Land at Martin Common Farm, Bawtry 34 36 Doncaster Main Urban Area 246: Scawthorpe Reservoir, Green Lane 106 13 Bawtry 874: Site B (Safeguarded), Land at Martin Common Farm, Bawtry 37 37 Doncaster Main Urban Area 436: Land at Scawsby Lane 109 14 Carcroft and Skellow 042: Land to the rear of Skellow Hall 40 38 Doncaster Main Urban Area 494: Green Lane, Scawthorpe 112 15 Carcroft and Skellow 145: Land at Skellow 43 39 Mexborough 139: Land north of Wath Road, Mexborough 115 16 Carcroft and Skellow 165: Land north of the A1, Skellow 46 40 Mexborough 154: Land to the north west of Pastures Road 118 17 Carcroft and Skellow 185: Land at Mill Lane and Crabgate, Skellow49 41 Sprotbrough 213: Mill Lane, Warmsworth 121 18 Carcroft and Skellow 186: Land off Crabgate Lane, Skellow 52 42 Sprotbrough 252: Spring Lane, Sprotbrough 124 19 Carcroft and Skellow 273: Askern Road, Carcroft 55 43 Sprotbrough 788: Land at Sprotbrough 127 20 Conisbrough 040: Land at Sheffield Road/Old Road, Hilltop, Conisbrough 58 44 Sprotbrough 872: Land at Melton Road, Sprotbrough 130 21 Conisbrough 142: Land south of Sheffield Road, Conisbrough 61 45 Tickhill 109: Land off Sunderland Street, Tickhill 133 22 Conisbrough 221: Garage off Sheffield Road/ Clifton Hill, Conisbrough (Site B) 64 46 Tickhill 281: Land off Worksop Road, Tickhill 136 23 Conisbrough 825: Fields off Drake Head Lane, Conisbrough 67 47 Tickhill 356: Land off Lindrick Lane, Tickhill 139

| Issue | 11 May 2017 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

48 Tickhill 357: Land off Wong Lane, Tickhill 142 54 Tickhill 880: Land at Tickhill 160

49 Tickhill 452: Land west of Dadsley Road, Tickhill 145 55 Wadworth 159: Land around Wadworth 163

50 Tickhill 824: Land behind Lumley Drive, Tickhill 148 56 ANNEXED SITE: Land Between Lindrick Lane and Worksop Road, Tickhill 168

51 Tickhill 875: Site A, Land to east of Doncaster Road, Tickhill 151 57 ANNEXED SITE: Land North of Cadeby Road, Sprotbrough 171

52 Tickhill 876: Site B, Land to east of Doncaster Road, Tickhill 154

53 Tickhill 877: Site C, Land to east of Doncaster Road, Tickhill 157

| Issue | 11 May 2017 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

1 Adwick le Street 458: Land off Church Lane, Adwick

Proposed Green Belt 458 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land off Church Lane, Adwick Site Size 3.2 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the north east of Adwick le Street. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Adwick Le Street 1 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Adwick Le Street 1, which forms part of a large, linear General Area that surrounds the north of Bentley and which extends to the north, east and south of Adwick Le Street. Area Assessment Bentley is considered to be part of the Main Urban Area of Doncaster and therefore the General Area is connected to the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster (Purpose 1, Score 3). • The General Area has a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging by providing land gaps between Scawthorpe in Bentley and Adwick le Street and Highfields; Adwick le Street and Carcroft and Skellow; between Adwick le Street and Carcroft; and between Bentley and Toll Bar. Overall within the General Area, there are two areas which support an essential gap and two areas where the Green Belt supports a largely essential gap (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The General Area has permitted ribbon development along the Great North Road, but has resisted development along the B1220 (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The General Area is characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and gappy field boundaries. Aside from tree corridor in the south, the Green Belt within this General Area is generally considered to contain components which are easily replaced and not considered to be rare or distinctive. The Green Belt is considered to have a limited tolerance to change and therefore displays a moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 3). The General Area contains 2.8% built form which supports a semi-urban character (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Doncaster has a complex historic core, which is separated from the Green Belt to the south of the General Area by post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). There are also no views of the historic core of Doncaster from the Green Belt within Adwick le Street 1 (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • The General Area is considered to be connected to the Regeneration Priority Area of Doncaster and Adwick Le Street, therefore the General Area is directing development towards brownfield land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 3). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by an indented area of built form along Mill Lane, an irregular area of built form along Village Street, an indented area of built form along Farm Court and the extent of St Laurence Belt Boundary represent C of E Church. The existing western boundary is therefore considered to be weakly defined. To the south, the existing Green Belt boundary is defined by Church Lane, which a strongly defined and durable Green Belt a ‘boundary which is boundary. The existing Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be weakly defined in the west and stronger in the south. ‘recognisable and likely The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by the extent of shallow drainage ditch in the north east, a weakly defined field boundary with moderate scale shrubs in central northern area and a railway line in the far to be permanent’ north. The Proposed Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be very strong in the far north, and weak elsewhere. The Proposed Green Belt and therefore the Resultant Green Belt boundary are considered to be mixed in strength.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 1 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the east of Adwick le Street, which was identified as a ‘Large Urban Area’ within the Local Plan Issues and Options Draft (July 2015) and a ‘Main built-up areas. Town’ in the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Adwick le Street is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a land gap between the ‘Main Town’ of Adwick le Street and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ of Carcroft and Skellow. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Whilst the area to the south west performs this role to a weaker degree, the north eastern area of the Proposed Site has a strong role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. Specifically the neighbouring development that would result in area to the north east of the shallow drainage ditch contains a relatively dense area of trees which provides the only degree of separation between these settlements. The curvature of the B1220 road towns from merging, coalescence or significant and the end of the built form does also allow for perception of leaving one place and entering the next, however this is supported by the dense area of trees along Church Lane. Therefore, the Green merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Belt surrounding the Adwick train station and railway line supports an ‘essential gap’ between settlements, which would be completely eroded following the release of the Proposed Green Belt site one another. a valued gap between neighbouring from the Green Belt. settlements within the District. The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore falls within an essential land gap. Score: 5 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed To the north of Church Lane, the existing Green Belt boundary has strongly resisted ribbon development. However, built form does exist to the south of Church Lane and therefore, the existing Green Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Belt boundary is considered to have resisted ribbon development in part. development which would Score: 3 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area is generally characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and ‘gappy’ field boundaries. Whilst the topography within the wider assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and General Area slopes from the west to the east and towards the north, it is predominantly flat on the whole. This topography within the wider General Area supports long distance views to the east and safeguarding features important to the some to the north. the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Green Belt land within the General Area as falling within the C2 Cadeby to Adwick Limestone Plateau. Land within this area is countryside change. considered to dip gently to the north and east, with large scale intensive arable farmland with some pasture around settlements. In some locations, there is an open feel with extensive views to the east from and west, however there is also some modern influences (including the motorway and railway line) which locally change the character of the area. encroachment. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: Land within the Proposed Green Belt Site contains arable land and a dense copse of trees adjacent to the railway line. Whilst views do exist to the north, high levels of containment within the existing built form do mean that development would not be in conflict with the landform, scale or patterns of the landscape. Land is generally in a fair condition, however development within this location would have an impact on the vulnerable copse of trees to the north east of the Site and an impact on the setting on of the Adwick le Street conservation area, including the Grade II* Listed St Laurence Church. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to have a very limited tolerance to change and contain components that are not easily replaced or substituted. The Proposed Site is therefore considered to contain features of a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.05% built form and is therefore considered to display a ‘Strong Rural Character’. features within the Proposed Green Score: 4 Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Whilst the Proposed Green Belt site falls within the Conservation Area for Adwick le Street, this settlement is not considered to represent a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’ in the local interpretation preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role of Purpose 4. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore does not support the setting or special character of a ‘historic town’. setting and in supporting the character of the Despite this, further heritage impact assessment work would be necessary to understand the heritage implications of development at this location on the Conservation Area. special Historic Town or Place within the Score: 1 character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Given Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of the Purpose, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to support views into and out of the historic Proposed Green Belt Site has a role core. in supporting the views into and out Despite this, further heritage impact assessment work would be necessary to understand the heritage implications of development at this location on the Conservation Area. of the historic core. Score: 1

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 2 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority within the Core Strategy. Given the highly contained nature of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the be contiguous with the Regeneration Priority Area of Adwick le Street. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 4 Summary The General Area has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The General Area is considered to have a moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location has a moderate sensitivity to encroachment and supports a semi-urban character. The wider Green Belt General Area is considered to have a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008). The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by the extent of a shallow drainage ditch in the north east, a weakly defined field boundary with moderate scale shrubs in central northern area and a railway line in the far north. The Proposed Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be very strong in the far north, and weak elsewhere. The Proposed Green Belt Site and therefore the Resultant Green Belt boundary are considered to be mixed in strength. The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a moderately strong role when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, the Proposed Green Belt site (particularly in the northern area) is considered to play a strong role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. Although the Proposed Green Belt Site falls within the Conservation Area, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Site has only a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. Nevertheless, when assessed for the extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, the Site is considered to contain features which are not easily replaced and therefore possess a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. As Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 3 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

2 Adwick le Street 459: Land off Doncaster Lane, Adwick

Proposed Green Belt 459 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land off Doncaster Lane, Adwick Site Size 14.1 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the east of Adwick le Street. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Adwick Le Street 1 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Adwick Le Street 1, which forms part of a large, linear General Area that surrounds the north of Bentley and which extends to the north, east and south of Adwick Le Street. Area Assessment Bentley is considered to be part of the Main Urban Area of Doncaster and therefore the General Area is connected to the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster (Purpose 1, Score 3). • The General Area has a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging by providing land gaps between Scawthorpe in Bentley and Adwick le Street and Highfields; Adwick le Street and Carcroft and Skellow; between Adwick le Street and Carcroft; and between Bentley and Toll Bar. Overall within the General Area, there are two areas which support an essential gap and two areas where the Green Belt supports a largely essential gap (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The General Area has permitted ribbon development along the Great North Road, but has resisted development along the B1220 (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The General Area is characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and gappy field boundaries. Aside from tree corridor in the south, the Green Belt within this General Area is considered to contain components which are easily replaced and not considered to be rare or distinctive. The Green Belt is considered to have a limited tolerance to change and therefore displays a moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 3). The General Area contains 2.8% built form which supports a semi-urban character (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Doncaster has a complex historic core, which is separated from the Green Belt to the south of the General Area by post-WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). There are also no views of the historic core of Doncaster from the Green Belt within Adwick le Street 1 (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • The General Area is considered to be connected to the Regeneration Priority Area of Doncaster and Adwick Le Street, therefore the General Area is directing development towards brownfield land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 3). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by Doncaster Lane in the north and west, which indents around a protruding area of residential built form along Park View. The existing Green Belt boundary is therefore considered Belt Boundary represent to be predominantly strong and only weakened by the area of built form associated with Park View. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by an angular area of built form along Doncaster Lane in the north, a weakly defined shallow field boundary in the east which is not supported by any other features, and a ‘recognisable and likely field boundary in the south. The Proposed Green Belt boundary features and the Resultant Boundary would be weakly defined, weakly recognisable in the long-term and unlikely to be permanent. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 4 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the west of Adwick le Street, which was identified as a ‘Large Urban Area’ within the Local Plan Issues and Options Draft (July 2015) and a ‘Main built-up areas. Town’ in the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Adwick le Street is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a land gap between the ‘Main Town’ of Adwick le Street and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ of Carcroft and Skellow. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Whilst the area to the south and west performs this role to a weaker degree, the area to the north east of the Proposed Site has a strong role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. neighbouring development that would result in Specifically, the Proposed Green Belt site extends as far north east as the operational railway line, beyond the existing residential development along Doncaster Lane. Therefore, if this area was towns from merging, coalescence or significant released from the Green Belt, this would result in partial coalescence between these settlements. The Green Belt surrounding Adwick le Street train station therefore supports an ‘essential gap’ merging into erosion, both physical or visually of between settlements, which would be completely eroded following the release of the Proposed Green Belt site from the Green Belt. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore falls within an essential land gap. settlements within the District. Score: 5 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed Built form does exist to the south of Church Lane which has occurred since the designation of the Green Belt. Therefore, the existing Green Belt boundary is considered to have resisted ribbon Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon development in part which would continue to reduce the perception of separation between settlements. development which would Score: 3 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area is generally characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and ‘gappy’ field boundaries. Whilst the topography within the wider assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and General Area slopes from the west to the east and towards the north, it is predominantly flat on the whole. This topography within the wider General Area supports long distance views to the east and safeguarding features important to the some to the north. the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Green Belt land within the General Area as falling within the C2 Cadeby to Adwick Limestone Plateau. Land within this area is countryside change. considered to dip gently to the north and east, with large scale intensive arable farmland with some pasture around settlements. In some locations, there is an open feel with extensive views to the east from and west, however there are also some modern influences (including the motorway and railway line) which locally change the character of the area. encroachment. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: Land within the Proposed Green Belt site is of a similar character to the wider General Area. The Proposed Green Belt Site contains two large agricultural fields in close proximity to the operational railway line and therefore it contains features which are considered to be easily replaced. Whilst the Proposed Green belt Site is considered to be adjacent to the Adwick le Street Conservation Area and associated listed buildings, the large majority of the site is not considered to contain features which are rare or distinctive. Land at this location is considered to be in a fair condition and have a limited tolerance to change. There are long distance views to the east and south, and therefore development at this location would have an impact on views across the area. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.00% built form and is therefore should be considered to display a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. However as a result of the operational railway in the features within the Proposed Green east and the presence of the angular area of built form to the south of Doncaster Lane, the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be more reflective of a ‘Strong Rural Character’. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Whilst the Proposed Green Belt site is in close proximity to the Conservation Area for Adwick le Street, the settlement is not considered to represent a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Purpose 4. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore does not support the setting or special character of a ‘historic town’. setting and in supporting the character of the Despite this, further historic impact assessment work may be necessary to understand the heritage implications of development at this location on the Conservation Area. special Historic Town or Place within the Score: 1 character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Given Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of the Purpose, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to support views into and out of a historic Proposed Green Belt Site has a role core. in supporting the views into and out Despite this, further historic impact assessment work may be necessary to understand the heritage implications of development at this location on the Conservation Area. of the historic core. Score: 1 Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority within the Core Strategy. Given the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the to and in close proximity with the Regeneration Priority Area of Adwick le Street. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 3

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 5 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The General Area has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The General Area is considered to have a moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location has a moderate sensitivity to encroachment and supports a semi-urban character. The wider Green Belt General Area is considered to have a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008). The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by an angular area of built form along Doncaster Lane in the north, a weakly defined shallow field boundary in the east which is not supported by any other features, and a field boundary in the south. The Proposed Green Belt boundary features and the Resultant Boundary would be weakly defined, weakly recognisable in the long-term and unlikely to be permanent. The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a moderately strong role when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, the Proposed Green Belt site (particularly in the northern area) is considered to play a strong role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a Strong Rural Character, as a result of no built form within the Site; however overall, the Site is considered to contain features of moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Although the Proposed Green Belt Site is adjacent to the Conservation Area, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Site has only a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. As Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 6 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

3 Adwick le Street 461: Redhouse Lane (a) North West, Adwick

Proposed Green Belt 461 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Redhouse Lane (a) South, Adwick Site Size 34 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the north of Adwick le Street. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Adwick Le Street 1 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Adwick Le Street 1, which forms part of a large, linear General Area that surrounds the north of Bentley and which extends to the north, east and south of Adwick Le Street. Area Assessment Bentley is considered to be part of the Main Urban Area of Doncaster and therefore the General Area is connected to the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster (Purpose 1, Score 3). • The General Area has a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging by providing land gaps between Scawthorpe in Bentley and Adwick le Street and Highfields; Adwick le Street and Carcroft and Skellow; between Adwick le Street and Carcroft; and between Bentley and Toll Bar. Overall within the General Area, there are two areas which support an essential gap and two areas where the Green Belt supports a largely essential gap (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The General Area has permitted ribbon development along the Great North Road, but has resisted development along the B1220 (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The General Area is characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and gappy field boundaries. Aside from tree corridor in the south, the Green Belt within this General Area is considered to contain components which are easily replaced and not considered to be rare or distinctive. The Green Belt is considered to have a limited tolerance to change and therefore displays a moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 3). The General Area contains 2.8% built form which supports a semi-urban character (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Doncaster has a complex historic core, which is separated from the Green Belt to the south of the General Area by post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). There are also no views of the historic core of Doncaster from the Green Belt within Adwick le Street 1 (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • The General Area is considered to be connected to the Regeneration Priority Area of Doncaster and Adwick Le Street, therefore the General Area is directing development towards brownfield land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 3). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be strongly defined by A1 (M) and the Great North Road A638 in the south west. Belt Boundary represent The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by the A1(M) and the Great North Road A638 in the south west, the strongly defined operational railway line in the north, Redhouse Lane in the south and a weakly defined a ‘boundary which is field boundary and cemetery in the east. The Proposed Green Belt features are therefore mixed in strength, strong in the north, south and west and weak in the east. In isolation, however, release of the Proposed Green Belt site ‘recognisable and likely would result in a weak Resultant Green Belt boundary which would acutely protrude from the A1(M) with no connection to an area of existing built form. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore be somewhat to be permanent’ weaker than the features which form its boundary. Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 7 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the north of Adwick le Street, which was identified as a ‘Large Urban Area’ within the Issues and Options Draft (2015) and a ‘Main Town’ in the built-up areas. Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Adwick le Street is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a land gap between the ‘Main Town’ of Adwick le Street and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ of Carcroft and Skellow. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting This land gap is comprised of the extent of the arable fields, the marshland associated with Old Ea Beck and The Skell and the change in topography created by the former Carcroft mine. Views are neighbouring development that would result in possible between settlements, and the A1(M) links both the settlements. Despite this there is a clear perception of separation between settlements. In isolation, the Proposed Green Belt Site therefore towns from merging, coalescence or significant falls within and maintains a largely essential gap, where there is sufficient physical, visual and perceptual separation that some development would not result in merging. merging into erosion, both physical or visually of However, should the land to the north of the railway line also be developed, the Green Belt within the Proposed Site would represent an essential gap along the A1(M). one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 3 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The Great North Road and the A1(M) exists to the west of the site and links Adwick le Street with Carcroft in the north. Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Given the nature and northern extent of the Proposed Green Belt site, development would represent ribbon development along the A1(M) which would perceptibly reduce the perception of separation development which would along this access track. This would be particularly pronounced if land to the north of the railway line was also developed. otherwise have resulted in the Score: 5 reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area is generally characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and ‘gappy’ field boundaries. Whilst the topography within the area assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and slopes from the west to the east and towards the north, it is predominantly flat on the whole. This topography supports long distance views to the east and some to the north. safeguarding features important to the The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Green Belt land within the General Area as falling within the C2 Cadeby to Adwick Limestone Plateau. Land within this area is the appreciation of the countryside to considered to dip gently to the north and east, with large scale intensive arable farmland with some pasture around settlements. In some locations, there is an open feel with extensive views to the east countryside change. and west, however there are also some modern influences (including the motorway and railway line) which locally change the character of the area. from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site comprises a number of agricultural fields which exist to the north of Redhouse Lane and west of the A1(M), and the marshland encroachment. areas associated with The Skell in the north east of the area. Aside from the north west of the area which contains the distinctive features associated with the Skell, the wider Green Belt Site is therefore considered to be relatively tolerant of change and contain no distinctive components. However, as a result of the declining topography, limited levels of containment and long views to the north, development at this location would have a negative impact on the physical landform and have an impact on views across the area. As a result of the area of marshland to the north which is considered to be a distinctive feature, the Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to contain features which are moderately-high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The General Area contains approximately 0.75% built form associated with the two pylons within the area. The General Area is therefore considered to display a ‘Strong Rural Character’. features within the Proposed Green Score: 4 Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Adwick le Street is not considered to represent a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore does not support the setting or special character of a preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role ‘historic town’. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Given Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of the Purpose, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to support views into and out of the historic Proposed Green Belt Site has a role core. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority within the Core Strategy. Given the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the to but not in close proximity to the Regeneration Priority Area of Adwick le Street. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 2 Summary The General Area has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The General Area is considered to have a moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location has a moderate sensitivity to encroachment and supports a semi-urban character. The wider Green Belt General Area is considered to have a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008).

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 8 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Whilst the Green Belt boundaries would be mixed in strength, release of the Proposed Green Belt site in isolation would result in a weak Resultant Green Belt boundary which would acutely protrude from the A1(M) with no connection to an area of existing built form. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore be somewhat weaker than the features which form its boundary. The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a modest role when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The role of the Proposed Green Belt site in preventing neighbouring towns from merging would increase to an essential gap if development were to take place to the north of the railway line. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of a moderate-high sensitivity to development, which displays a Strong Rural Character. As Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Green Belt Site has only a limited role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. As Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a role, albeit moderately weak, in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 9 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

4 Adwick le Street 462: Land off Adwick Lane, Carcroft

Proposed Green Belt 462 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land off Adwick Lane, Carcroft Site Size 57.6 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the east of Carcroft and west of Toll Bar relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Bentley 3 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Bentley 3, which is situated to the north of Rosholme in Bentley and between Carcroft and Toll Bar in the north. Given the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary and Area Assessment relatively low levels of containment, Bentley 3 is considered to be connected to Main Urban Area of Doncaster and therefore have a moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of this ‘Large Urban Area’ (Purpose 1, Score 3). • The General Area has a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging including between Rosholme within Bentley and Adwick le Street; Bentley and Carcroft and Skellow; Toll Bar and Bentley; and Toll Bar and Adwick Le Street. The General Area displays a mixed role in supporting the separation of neighbouring settlements. On balance, the General Area contains one land gap which is considered to be essential, two gaps which are largely essential, and one gap which is considered to not prevent merging (Purpose 2a, Score 3). The General Area is bordered by the A19 to the east and contains Adwick Lane and Bentley Moor Lane, and there are no instances of ribbon development beyond the existing Green Belt boundary along any of these routes (Purpose 2b, Score 5). • The General Area is generally characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and ‘gappy’ field boundaries. Green Belt within this General Area is considered to contain components which are generally easily replaced and which are not considered to be rare or distinctive. Development within this location would have an impact on views and have a negative impact on the physical landform. The General Area therefore displays a moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 3). The General Area contains very limited built form (0.41%) aside from a small area of open storage. The General Area therefore displays a strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 4). • Whilst Doncaster is considered to have a ‘Complex Historic Core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation, this is separated from the Green Belt by a natural boundary and post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 3). There are also no historic views towards the historic core of Doncaster from the Green Belt in Bentley 3 (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • The General Area is considered to be connected to the Regeneration Priority Areas of Doncaster and Carcroft and Skellow and therefore the General Area is considered to be directing development towards brownfield land within the development limits (Purpose 5, Score 3). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is defined by a field drain in the north west, the built extent of the Brooklands Industrial Estate in the north and Carcroft Industrial Estate and an existing allocation for Belt Boundary represent employment which has not been developed. The existing Green Belt boundaries are therefore considered to be weak and unlikely to be durable. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by the strongly defined operational railway line in the west, and a weakly defined field boundary in the south supported by a field drain in the south east. The Proposed ‘recognisable and likely Green Belt boundaries, and therefore the Resultant Green Belt boundary, are therefore considered to be mixed in strength: strongly defined in the west and weak in the south. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength, strong in the west and weak in the south

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 10 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site exists to the south of Carcroft and Skellow, which was identified as a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and built-up areas. Settlements (March 2016), and Toll Bar which was identified as a ‘Defined Village’. Neither of these settlements are considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to be connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site must be assessed for the extent to which it has a role in separating Toll Bar, a ‘Defined Village’ and Carcroft which is identified as a ‘Service Town and Village’. The prevent Green Belt Site in resisting boundaries of Carcroft and Toll Bar connect briefly where Bentley Moor Lane crosses the Old Ea Beck. However, although allocated for employment and considered to fall within the development neighbouring development that would result in limits of Toll Bar, the northern edge of Toll Bar has not been built out. When the allocated land at the north of Toll Bar has been built upon, the physical separation of these two settlements will be towns from merging, coalescence or significant indistinguishable. Therefore the Green Belt at this location has no role in preventing the merging of settlements as the employment allocation has already created the principle for merging of these merging into erosion, both physical or visually of settlements to take place. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Release of the Proposed Green Belt site also must be assessed for the extent to which it has a role in maintaining separation between Toll Bar and Carcroft, with Adwick le Street further in the west. settlements within the District. However, this land gap is created by the land to the west of the operational railway line along Doncaster Lane because of the extent of the existing built form around the station. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt site also has no discernable role in preventing the merging of neighbouring settlements. Score: 0 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site contains Adwick Lane and Bentley Moor Lane. The existing Green Belt boundary has therefore strongly resisted ribbon development. However, as a result of the Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon employment allocation which joins these two settlements, ribbon development along this route would not contribute further to ribbon development. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area is generally characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and ‘gappy’ field boundaries. Whilst the topography within the area assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and slopes from the west to the east and towards the north, it is very flat on the whole. This topography supports views between Bentley, Adwick le Street, Carcroft and Skellow and Toll Bar. safeguarding features important to the The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Green Belt land within the General Area as falling within the F1 Toll Bar Settled Clay Farmlands. Land within this General Area the appreciation of the countryside to comprises mainly flat landform with a restored spoil heap further to the east. This area represents a network of larger settlements which have by in large merged with Doncaster Urban Area. There countryside change. are a limited number of trees and therefore views are generally very open. This is a moderately distinctive character area. from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore comprises a number of agricultural fields surrounded by shallow field drains. The Green Belt at this location is encroachment. therefore considered to contain features which are generally easily replaced and no features which are considered to be rare and distinctive. However, as a result of the long-distance views and flat landform, development at this location would have an impact on views across the area. Land at this location is therefore considered to have a limited tolerance to change. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form and is therefore considered to have a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. If the employment allocation to the north east of the Proposed Site features within the Proposed Green had been developed, the Proposed Site would be more characteristic of a Strong Rural Character. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 5 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Neither Adwick le Street or Carcroft and Skellow are considered to represent a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4. Whilst the Main Urban Area of Doncaster, which exists preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role 2.5km to the south of the site, is considered to have a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to be in close proximity to a ‘Historic Core’ and has no role in setting and in supporting the character of the supporting the setting and special character of the historic town. special Historic Town or Place within the The Proposed Green Belt site therefore does not support the setting or special character of a ‘historic town’. character of Borough. Score: 1 historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Adwick le Street nor Carcroft and Skellow are not considered to represent a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4. Whilst the Main Urban Area of Doncaster, which exists 2.5km to Proposed Green Belt Site has a role the south of the site, is considered to have a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’ there are only very limited views from the Proposed Green Belt site towards the Complex Historic Core of Doncaster. in supporting the views into and out Score: 2 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Adwick le Street, and Carcroft and Skellow, is identified as a Regeneration Priority within the Core Strategy. Given the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt site is Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the considered to be connected to and in close proximity to the Regeneration Priority Area of Carcroft and Skellow. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 3 Summary The General Area has a mixed role when assessed against the local interpretation of Green Belt Purposes within Doncaster. The wider General Area is considered to have a moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of the large built up area of Doncaster, a moderate role in directing development towards brownfield within the development limits, a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and a strong role in resisting

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 11 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

ribbon development. The General Area is considered to display a moderate sensitivity to encroachment and have a strong rural character. The Green Belt at this location is considered to have a moderately weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined in the operational railway line in the west, and a weakly defined field boundary in the south supported by a field drain in the south east. The Proposed Green Belt boundaries, and therefore the Resultant Green Belt boundary, are therefore considered to be mixed in strength: strongly defined in the west and weak in the south. The Proposed Green Belt site would have a moderate role when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt purposes. The Proposed Green Belt site would have a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of the large built up area, no role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging as this has already happened through the employment land allocation and moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt site does not support the setting or special character of a historic town. However, the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderate sensitivity to encroachment and 0.0% built form. If the employment allocation to the north east of the Proposed Site had been developed, the Proposed Site would be more characteristic of a Strong Rural Character.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 12 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

5 Adwick le Street 512: Redhouse Lane (b) North East, Adwick

Proposed Green Belt 512 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Redhouse Lane (b) South, Adwick Site Size 13.3 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the north of Adwick le Street. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Adwick Le Street 1 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Adwick Le Street 1, which forms part of a large, linear General Area that surrounds the north of Bentley and which extends to the north, east and south of Adwick Le Street. Area Assessment Bentley is considered to be part of the Main Urban Area of Doncaster and therefore the General Area is connected to the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster (Purpose 1, Score 3). • The General Area has a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging by providing land gaps between Scawthorpe in Bentley and Adwick le Street and Highfields; Adwick le Street and Carcroft and Skellow; between Adwick le Street and Carcroft; and between Bentley and Toll Bar. Overall within the General Area, there are two areas which support an essential gap and two areas where the Green Belt supports a largely essential gap (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The General Area has permitted ribbon development along the Great North Road, but has resisted development along the B1220 (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The General Area is characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and gappy field boundaries. Aside from tree corridor in the south, the Green Belt within this General Area is considered to contain components which are easily replaced and not considered to be rare or distinctive. The Green Belt is considered to have a limited tolerance to change and therefore displays a moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 3). The General Area contains 2.8% built form which supports a semi-urban character (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Doncaster has a complex historic core, which is separated from the Green Belt to the south of the General Area by post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). There are also no views of the historic core of Doncaster from the Green Belt within Adwick le Street 1 (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • The General Area is considered to be connected to the Regeneration Priority Area of Doncaster and Adwick Le Street, therefore the General Area is directing development towards brownfield land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 3). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be strongly defined by Kestrel Drive, Kingfisher Road and Woodcock Way. The existing Green Belt boundary defined by this linear area of residential built form is considered Belt Boundary represent to be strongly defined, recognisable and likely to be durable. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be weakly defined by a field boundary in the north and the extent of weakly defined field drain in the north east. Whilst Red House Lane predominantly forms the southern boundary of ‘recognisable and likely the General Area, this sharply indents in the central area by a number of field boundaries. Whilst Red House Lane to the south does form a strongly defined and durable feature, the strength of all other boundaries and the to be permanent’ weakly defined, central indented area means that the Proposed Green Belt Boundaries are considered to be weak. In isolation, the Resultant Green Belt boundary would create an angular area of residential built form which acutely extends to the north of Adwick le Street. Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 13 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the north of Adwick le Street, which was identified as a ‘Large Urban Area’ within the Issues and Options Draft (2015) and a ‘Main Town’ in the built-up areas. Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Adwick le Street is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a land gap between the ‘Main Town’ of Adwick le Street and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ of Carcroft and Skellow. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting This land gap is created in part by the extent of the arable fields, the marshland associated with Old Ea Beck and The Skell and the change in topography created by the former Carcroft mine. Views neighbouring development that would result in are intermittently possible between settlements, and the A1(M) links both the settlements further to the west. Despite this there is a clear perception of separation between settlements. In isolation, the towns from merging, coalescence or significant Proposed Green Belt Site therefore falls within and maintains a largely essential gap, where there is sufficient physical, visual and perceptual separation that some development would not result in merging into erosion, both physical or visually of merging. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring However, should the land to the north of the railway line also be developed, the Green Belt within the Proposed Site would represent an essential gap. settlements within the District. Score: 3 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed Whilst Redhouse Lane exists to the west of the Proposed Green Belt site, there are no access tracks within the Proposed Green Belt Site which would directly link both settlements. Therefore the Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Proposed Green Belt Site contains no access routes which would have reduced the perception of separation between settlements. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area is generally characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and ‘gappy’ field boundaries. Whilst the topography within the area assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and slopes from the west to the east and towards the north, it is predominantly flat on the whole. This topography supports long distance views to the east and some to the north. safeguarding features important to the The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Green Belt land within the General Area as falling within the C2 Cadeby to Adwick Limestone Plateau. Land within this area is the appreciation of the countryside to considered to dip gently to the north and east, with large scale intensive arable farmland with some pasture around settlements. In some locations, there is an open feel with extensive views to the east countryside change. and west, however there is also some modern influences (including the railway line) which locally change the character of the area. from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site comprises a number of agricultural fields which exist to the north of Redhouse Lane, and areas adjacent to the marshland areas encroachment. associated with The Skell in the north. Aside from the north west of the area which is adjacent to features associated with the Skell, the wider Green Belt Site is considered to be relatively tolerant of change and contain no distinctive components. However, as a result of the declining topography, limited levels of containment and long views to the north, development at this location would have a negative impact on the physical landform and have an impact on views across the area. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to contain features which are of moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The General Area contains approximately 0.75% built form associated with the two pylons within the area. The General Area is therefore considered to display a ‘Strong Rural Character’. landscape features within the Score: 4 Proposed Green Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Adwick le Street is not considered to represent a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore does not support the setting or special character of a preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role ‘historic town’. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Given Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of the Purpose, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to support views into and out of the historic Proposed Green Belt Site has a role core. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority within the Core Strategy. Given the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the to and in close proximity to the Regeneration Priority Area of Adwick le Street. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 3 Summary The General Area has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The General Area is considered to have a moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location has a moderate sensitivity to encroachment and supports a semi-urban

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 14 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

character. The wider Green Belt General Area is considered to have a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008). The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be weakly defined by a field boundary in the north and the extent of weakly defined field drain in the north east. Whilst Red House Lane predominantly forms the southern boundary of the General Area, this sharply indents in the central area by a number of field boundaries. Whilst Red House Lane to the south forms a strongly defined and durable feature, the strength of all other boundaries and the weakly defined, central indented area means that the Proposed Green Belt Boundaries are considered to be weak. In isolation, the Resultant Green Belt boundary would create an angular area of residential built form which acutely extends to the north of Adwick le Street. The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a modest role when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The role of the Proposed Green Belt site in preventing neighbouring towns from merging would increase to an essential gap if development were to take place to the north of the railway line. The Green Belt at this location is considered to have a moderate role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment: land contains features which are of moderate sensitivity to encroachment, and displays a ‘strong rural character’. As Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Green Belt Site has only a limited role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. As Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 15 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

6 Adwick le Street 513: Redhouse Lane (C) South, Adwick

Proposed Green Belt 513 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Redhouse Lane (c) South, Adwick Site Size 27.7 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the north of Adwick le Street. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Adwick Le Street 1 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Adwick Le Street 1, which forms part of a large, linear General Area that surrounds the north of Bentley and which extends to the north, east and south of Adwick Le Street. Area Assessment Bentley is considered to be part of the Main Urban Area of Doncaster and therefore the General Area is connected to the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster (Purpose 1, Score 3). • The General Area has a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging by providing land gaps between Scawthorpe in Bentley and Adwick le Street and Highfields; Adwick le Street and Carcroft and Skellow; between Adwick le Street and Carcroft; and between Bentley and Toll Bar. Overall within the General Area, there are two areas which support an essential gap and two areas where the Green Belt supports a largely essential gap (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The General Area has permitted ribbon development along the Great North Road, but has resisted development along the B1220 (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The General Area is characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and gappy field boundaries. Aside from tree corridor in the south, the Green Belt within this General Area is considered to contain components which are easily replaced and not considered to be rare or distinctive. The Green Belt is considered to have a limited tolerance to change and therefore displays a moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 3). The General Area contains 2.8% built form which supports a semi-urban character (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Doncaster has a complex historic core, which is separated from the Green Belt to the south of the General Area by post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). There are also no views of the historic core of Doncaster from the Green Belt within Adwick le Street 1 (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • The General Area is considered to be connected to the Regeneration Priority Area of Doncaster and Adwick le Street, therefore the General Area is directing development towards brownfield land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 3). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be relatively strongly defined by residential built form along Lutterworth Drive, Bosworth Road and Whinfell Close. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by Belt Boundary represent Red House Lane in the north and east, and the extent of the Great North Road in the east. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore result in a strongly defined feature which would represent a natural rounding off to a ‘boundary which is north of Adwick le Street to mirror the extent of built form to the west of the Great North Road. ‘recognisable and likely Resultant Boundary Strength: Strong to be permanent’

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 16 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary adjoins the northern edge of Adwick le Street, which was identified as a ‘Large Urban Area’ within the Issues and Options Draft (2015) and a ‘Main Town’ in built-up areas. the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation; Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Adwick le Street is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a land gap between the ‘Main Town’ of Adwick le Street and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ of Carcroft and Skellow. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting This is created in part by the extent of the arable fields, the marshland associated with Old Ea Beck and The Skell and the change in topography created by the former Carcroft mine. Views are neighbouring development that would result in intermittently possible between settlements, and the A1(M) links both the settlements. Despite this there is a clear perception of separation between settlements. The Proposed Green Belt Site towns from merging, coalescence or significant therefore falls within and maintains a largely essential gap, where there is sufficient physical, visual and perceptual separation that some development would not result in merging. merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Score: 3 one another. a valued gap between neighbouring settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The Great North Road and the A1(M) exists to the south west and west of the site and links Adwick le Street with Carcroft in the north. The existing Green Belt boundary had therefore resisted Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon ribbon development. development which would Given the extent of existing built form to the west of the Great North Road, the proposed Green Belt site would not result in any increase in ribbon development which would reduce the perception of otherwise have resulted in the separation between settlements. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore makes no perceptible contribution to separation. reduction of perceived separation Score: 0 between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area is generally characterised by large, irregular arable fields with low and ‘gappy’ field boundaries. Whilst the topography within the area assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and slopes from the west to the east and towards the north, it is predominantly flat on the whole. This topography supports long distance views to the east and some to the north. safeguarding features important to the The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Green Belt land within the General Area as falling within the C2 Cadeby to Adwick Limestone Plateau. Land within this area is the appreciation of the countryside to considered to dip gently to the north and east, with large scale intensive arable farmland with some pasture around settlements. In some locations, there is an open feel with extensive views to the east countryside change. and west, however there is also some modern influences (including the motorway and railway line) which locally change the character of the area. from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site comprises one agricultural field which is defined by Redhouse Lane. The Green Belt Site is therefore considered to be encroachment. relatively tolerant of change and contain no distinctive components. However, as a result of the declining topography, limited levels of containment and long views to the north, development at this location would have a negative impact on the physical landform and have an impact on views across the area. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to contain features which are moderately sensitive to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these There is no built form within the Proposed Green Belt Site, and therefore the Site could be considered to display a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. However, as a result of the A1(M) and the Great features within the Proposed Green North Road in the north and west, the Green Belt at this location is not considered to be unspoilt. The Green Belt at this location is therefore considered to be more characteristic of a ‘Strong Rural Belt Site have been impacted by Character’. ‘Encroachment’. Score: 4 Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Adwick le Street is not considered to represent a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4; Adwick le Street is not identified as a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’ in the South Yorkshire preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Historic Environment Characterisation. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore does not support the setting or special character of a ‘historic town’. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Given Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the local interpretation of the Purpose, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to support views into and out of the historic Proposed Green Belt Site has a role core. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority within the Core Strategy. Given the strength of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the to and in close proximity to the Regeneration Priority Area of Adwick le Street. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 3 Summary The General Area has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The General Area is considered to have a moderate role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location has a moderate sensitivity to encroachment and supports a semi-urban character. The wider Green Belt General Area is considered to have a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008).

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 17 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

The Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore result in a strongly defined feature which would represent a natural rounding off to north of Adwick le Street to mirror the extent of built form to the west of the Great North Road. The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a largely modest role when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. As Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Green Belt Site has only a limited role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. As Adwick le Street is identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. Although the Green Belt Site contains no built form, the land at this location is considered to only be of moderate sensitivity to encroachment. The Green Belt designation at this location has a moderate role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 18 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

7 Barnburgh and Harlington 143: Land north of Primary School, Church Lane, Barnburgh

Proposed Green Belt 143 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land North of Primary School, Church Lane, Barnburgh Site Size 1.9 Hectares Location of Site and The Proposed Green Belt site exists to the east of Harlington and Barnburgh. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing West 3 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within West 3, a large General Area surrounding Sprotbrough in the east and Harlington and Barnburgh in the west. Sprotbrough and Harlington are a Smaller Urban Area and Larger Area Assessment Village respectively, which means the General Area is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not in close proximity with any large built up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • West 3 supports a number of land gaps including between Sprotbrough, Doncaster, and ; High Melton and Sprotbrough and Cadeby and Sprotbrough; Sprotbrough and Conisbrough and Mexborough; Sprotbrough and Harlington; Sprotbrough and Balby; and Sprotbrough and Warmsworth. Overall, the General Area is balanced as supporting a largely essential gap (Purpose 2a, Score 3). Built form along Melton Road has changed since the designation of the Green Belt and therefore the existing Green Belt boundary has resisted further development in part. There is built form extending from the western edge of Sprotbrough along Melton Road or Cadeby Road towards either settlement, this has a strong role in resisting ribbon development. Overall, the General Area has resisted development in part (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The General Area is therefore considered to have a limited tolerance to change and a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The General Area contains 2.46% built form which would therefore indicate that the Green Belt has a semi-urban character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • High Melton, Sprotbrough, Marr, Barnburgh and have Conservation Areas, however these are not considered to form ‘historic towns’ within the Local Interpretation of the Purpose. Conisbrough, Mexborough and Urban Doncaster have Complex Historic Town Cores and the Green Belt within the General Area has a varied role in preserving the setting of these historic cores (Purpose 4a, Score 2). Channelled views are possible to from Green Belt land to the south of the General Area, these are not identified as key views on the Conisbrough Conservation Area mapping (Purpose 4b, Score 2). • West 3 is associated with one Regeneration Priority Area, but the boundary is not connected to but in close proximity with Mexborough (Purpose 5, Score 2). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by Church Lane to the west of the Proposed Green Belt Site and the extent of Barnburgh Primary School in the south. Whilst Green Belt features are relatively strong in isolation, the Belt Boundary represent existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be indented and angular, weak and unlikely to be durable. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be created by a weakly defined field boundary in the east and south east, the rear of residential dwellings along Fox Lane in the north and copse of trees in the north west. Whilst the ‘recognisable and likely Proposed Green Belt Boundary features are Mixed in Strength, the Resultant Green Belt boundary would be formed by a stepped and angular area of residential built form which would be more coherent than existing provision. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 19 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site exists to the east of the settlement of Barnburgh and Harlington, which is identified as a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: built-up areas. Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Neither of these settlements form part of a ‘Large Built Up Area’ and therefore, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt site falls within a land gap between Harlington and High Melton. High Melton is a ‘Defined Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements prevent Green Belt Site in resisting (March 2016) and therefore it must be assessed for opportunities to merge with a second or third tier settlement. neighbouring development that would result in This land gap is 2.25km and contains a dense corridor of trees along Doncaster Road, known as Melton Warren. Whilst Doncaster Road does however provide direct access between these towns from merging, coalescence or significant settlements, the topography is strongly undulating, which, in combination with the dense areas of woodland along Doncaster Road means that there are no views between settlements. The Proposed merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Green Belt Site therefore falls within and would continue to maintain a less essential land gap between settlements, where development proportionate to the scale of Barnburgh and Harlington is not one another. a valued gap between neighbouring likely to cause merging between settlements. settlements within the District. The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore maintains a less essential land gap between settlements. Score: 1 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed There are no access tracks within the Proposed Green Belt Site which could perceptibly reduce the separation between neighbouring settlements. Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Score: 0 development which would otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area contains land which is predominantly rural and open in character, with a strong countryside feel. The General Area is distinctly more assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and undulating towards the in the south. The General Area at this location is more enclosed, with small fields, taller field boundaries and dense tree corridors. There are long-distance views safeguarding features important to the towards settlements further to the west. The area contains a number of Public Rights of Way, with access tracks connecting settlements across the River Dearne. the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the western edge of West 3 as A3 Barnburgh to Hooton Pagnall Coalfield Farmland. The A3 landscape type is underlain by coal countryside change. measures with a number of small to medium fields bounded by mature hedgerows and trees. The landform is complex, undulating and in places cut by streams. The land rises to the east as a wooded from steep escarpment to the limestone plateau. Whilst there are occasional major transport corridors, including railway and main roads, there are many public rights of way and farm tracks. There are encroachment. some views to urban areas in the west beyond the landscape character area. Settlements include historic nucleated stone-built villages along with scattered farmsteads. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site comprises one agricultural field and a paddock in the north, which is bordered by mature trees to the north and an agricultural boundary to the east. Apart from the copse of woodland to the north, the Proposed Green Belt site predominantly contains features which are easily replaced. The area is considered to be in close proximity to the distinctive features of Barnburgh Conservation Area to the north; these feature are considered to be rare and distinctive. Whilst there are levels of containment created by the woodland to the north and the primary school to the south, there are extensive views to the east. Development at this location would have a negative impact on landform, views and the scale of the landscape. Land at this location is in a fair and maintained condition, and the Green Belt is considered to have a very limited tolerance to change. Overall the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form and should therefore be categorised as a ‘strong unspoilt rural character’. features within the Proposed Green Score: 5 Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Whilst Harlington does have a Conservation Area, Harlington and Barnburgh are not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the Local Interpretation of Purpose 4. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Site does not have a role in preserving the setting or special character of a Historic Town. setting and in supporting the character of the However, given the Site lies directly adjacent to the Conservation Area of Barnburgh, further work would need to be done to understand the heritage implications of releasing the Proposed Green special Historic Town or Place within the Belt Site on this designation. character of Borough. Score: 1 historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Whilst Harlington does have a Conservation Area, Harlington and Barnburgh are not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the Local Interpretation of Purpose 4. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Site does not have a role in preserving the setting or special character of a Historic Town. in supporting the views into and out However, given the Site lies directly adjacent to the Conservation Area of Barnburgh, further work would need to be done to understand the heritage implications of releasing the Proposed Green of the historic core. Belt Site on this designation. Score: 1

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 20 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Harlington and Barnburgh are not identified as Conservation Areas and therefore, the Green Belt General Area does not have a specific role in assisting in Urban Regeneration. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 1 recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Summary The General Area has only a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. Green Belt at this location is considered to have a moderately strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and a moderately weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. The General Area is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be created by a weakly defined field boundary in the east and south east, the rear of residential dwellings along Fox Lane in the north and copse of trees in the north west. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt Boundary features are Mixed in Strength, the Resultant Green Belt boundary would be formed by a stepped and angular area of residential built form which would be more coherent than existing provision. The Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, a weak role in assisting in urban regeneration and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. The Proposed Green Belt site would support a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and have a moderately-strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 21 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

8 Barnburgh and Harlington 777: ‘Plot 3’, Harlington

Proposed Green Belt 777 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name ‘Plot 3’ Harlington Site Size 2.4 Hectares Location of Site and The Proposed Green Belt site exists to the south east of Barnburgh and Harlington. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing West 3 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within West 3, a large General Area surrounding Sprotbrough in the east and Harlington in the west. Sprotbrough and Harlington are a Smaller Urban Area and Larger Village Area Assessment respectively, which means the General Area is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • West 3 supports a number of land gaps including between Sprotbrough, Doncaster, Goldthorpe and Bolton upon Dearne; High Melton and Sprotbrough and Cadeby and Sprotbrough; Sprotbrough and Conisbrough and Mexborough; Sprotbrough and Harlington; Sprotbrough and Balby; and Sprotbrough and Warmsworth. Overall, the General Area is balanced as supporting a largely essential gap (Purpose 2a, Score 3). Built form along Melton Road has changed since the designation of the Green Belt and therefore the existing Green Belt boundary has resisted further development in part. Overall, the General Area has resisted development in part (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The General Area contains land which is predominantly rural and open in character, with a strong countryside feel. To the west, the General Area displays high levels of containment, with stronger field boundaries and dense tree corridors. Whilst there are long-distance views to the east, development surrounding the existing settlements would not be in conflict with the landform or views. Whilst there are occasional copse of trees, and the river Dearne, there are fewer features which are considered to be components that are not easily replaced. The General Area is therefore considered to have a limited tolerance to change and a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment, particularly around the existing built form. Overall, the General Area contains Green Belt land that is moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The General Area contains 2.46% built form which would therefore indicate that the Green Belt has a semi-urban character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • High Melton, Sprotbrough, Marr, Barnburgh and Hickleton have Conservation Areas, however these are not considered to represent ‘historic towns’ within the Local Interpretation of the Purpose. Conisbrough, Mexborough and Urban Doncaster have Complex Historic Town Cores and the Green Belt within the General Area has a varied role in preserving the setting of these historic cores. (Purpose 4a, Score 2). Channelled views are possible to Conisbrough Castle from Green Belt land to the south of the General Area, these are not identified as key views on the Conisbrough Conservation Area mapping (Purpose 4b, Score 2). • West 3 is associated with one Regeneration Priority Area, but the boundary is not connected to but in close proximity with Mexborough (Purpose 5, Score 2). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by Mill Lane and a linear area of residential dwellings in the west, and Doncaster Road in the north. In the east, the existing Green Belt boundary extends to the south around an Belt Boundary represent agricultural shed. The existing Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be angular, indented, not recognisable and not likely to be permanent. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary is defined by the extent of residential development along Mill Lane, a field boundary supported by a pylon in the south and built form in the east. Whilst the southern boundary is defined by ‘recognisable and likely somewhat weak features, release of the Proposed Green Belt Site would result in a strong and linear, readily recognisable and likely to be permanent Green Belt boundary created by the extent of the built form at this location. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 22 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site exists to the east of the settlement of Barnburgh and Harlington, which is identified as a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: built-up areas. Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Neither of these settlements form part of a ‘Large Built Up Area’ and therefore, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site supports a land gap between Barnburgh and Harlington and Mexborough, which is identified as a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). neighbouring development that would result in At its closest distance, the Proposed Green Belt Site is approximately 1.15km from Mexborough. This land gap appears large, has arable fields and is characterised by a valley-feature which holds the towns from merging, coalescence or significant River Dearne. Whilst there are direct views between settlements which are unhindered by any tall vegetation, there is no direct access and therefore the Land Gap represents a Largely Essential Gap. merging into erosion, both physical or visually of The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore exists within and maintains a Largely Essential land gap. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 3 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed Whilst Doncaster Road exists to the north, as there is built form to the east of the Proposed Green Belt Site, the Green Belt at this location would have no role in resisting ribbon development which Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon could perceptibly reduce the separation between neighbouring settlements. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area contains land which is predominantly rural and open in character, with a strong countryside feel. The General Area is distinctly more assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and undulating towards the River Dearne in the south. The General Area at this location is more enclosed, with small fields, taller field boundaries and dense tree corridors. There are long-distance views safeguarding features important to the towards settlements further to the west. The area contains a number of Public Rights of Way, with access tracks connecting settlements across the River Dearne. the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the western edge of West 3 as A3 Barnburgh to Hooton Pagnall Coalfield Farmland. The A3 landscape type is underlain by coal countryside change. measures with a number of small to medium fields bounded by mature hedgerows and trees. The landform is complex, undulating and in places cut by streams. The land rises to the east as a wooded from steep escarpment to the limestone plateau. Whilst there are occasional major transport corridors, including railway and main roads, there are many public rights of way and farm tracks. There are encroachment. some views to urban areas in the west beyond the landscape character area. Settlements include historic nucleated stone-built villages along with scattered farmsteads. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site comprises a number of small agricultural fields which are only distinguished by a number of low-lying hedges and field boundaries. There is one large pylon to the south of the Site and a number of large industrial sheds in the east. The Green Belt at this location therefore contains features which are considered to be easily replaced and substituted, and indeed, in the east, the site is considered to contain features which are detract from the overall character of the countryside. Given the levels of containment, development of the Proposed Green Belt is likely to have a local impact on the physical landform and a limited effect on views or key features of the Green Belt. Land at this location is considered to contain features which have a low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 2 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 6.4% built form and therefore the site is considered to have a moderately-urban character. features within the Proposed Green Score: 1 Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Whilst Harlington does have a Conservation Area, Barnburgh and Harlington are not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the Local Interpretation of Purpose 4. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Site does not have a role in preserving the setting or special character of a Historic Town. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Whilst Harlington does have a Conservation Area, Barnburgh and Harlington are not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the Local Interpretation of Purpose 4. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Site does not have a role in preserving the setting or special character of a Historic Town. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Harlington and Barnburgh are not identified as Conservation Areas and therefore, the Green Belt General Area does not have a specific role in assisting in Urban Regeneration. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 1 recycling of derelict and other urban land’.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 23 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The General Area has only a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. Green Belt at this location is considered to have a moderately strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and a moderately weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. The General Area is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt boundary is defined by the extent of residential development along Mill Lane, a field boundary supported by a pylon in the south and built form in the east. Whilst the southern boundary is defined by somewhat weak features, release of the Proposed Green Belt Site would result in a strong and linear, readily recognisable and likely to be permanent Green Belt boundary created by the extent of the built form at this location. The Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, a weak role in assisting in urban regeneration and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. The Proposed Green Belt site would support a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 24 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

9 Bawtry 141: Westwood Road, Bawtry

Proposed Green Belt 141 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Westwood Road, Bawtry Site Size 0.7 Hectares Location of Site and The proposed Green Belt site is adjoins the south western boundary with Bawtry relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Bawtry 2 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Bawtry 2, to the south-western edge of Bawtry. This settlement is a Small Urban Area within the Issues and Options Draft (2015) and a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Area Assessment Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016) and is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but does not have a role in checking unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built Up Area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • Bawtry 2, as a whole, does have a role in maintaining a one kilometre land gap with Bircotes (a third tier settlement in Bassetlaw). However, the modern residential built form off Westwood Road, which adjoins the extent of the Local Authority boundary, does mean that there is no additional role for the Green Belt in preventing neighbouring towns from merging into one another. The Green Belt within Bawtry 2 therefore makes no discernable contribution to separation (Purpose 2a, Score 0). There are no instances of ribbon development along access tracks and therefore the existing Green Belt boundary has resisted ribbon development (Purpose 2b, Score 5). • The General Area is dominated by the Bawtry Hall Gardens and Fish Pond Wood, views are contained by the dense woodlands. There is one small area of the Green Belt to the south-west of the General Area, which comprises an area of scrubland. Development within this area would have limited effect on views and a local impact on physical landform. The sensitivity of the Green Belt to encroachment is predominantly high, with a small portion to the south-west considered to be low (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The General Area contains 2.8% built form and is a semi-urban character. Whilst the Green Belt is characterised by parkland associated with the Bawtry Hall, it displays a limited rural character thus the semi-urban character conclusion (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Bawtry has a complex historic core and the majority of the General Area is adjacent to the historic core of Bawtry (Purpose 4a, Score 5). The edge of the Bawtry Historic Core is defined by the Conservation Area which includes Bawtry Hall. There are no views to Green Belt from the Historic Core, but there are direct and channelled views towards the Historic Core from the Green Belt (Purpose 4b, Score 3). • Bawtry is not identified as a Regeneration Priority Area within Doncaster. Therefore, the Green Belt at this location does not have a specific role in supporting urban regeneration (Purpose 5, Score 1). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is defined by Westwood Road. The existing Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be strongly defined and likely to be durable. Belt Boundary represent The proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by a strongly defined wooded area, which is likely to be permanent in the west; the Doncaster Administrative Boundary in the south which is supported by a drain a ‘boundary which is associated with the River Idle, and Westwood Road in the north east. The proposed Green Belt boundary features are therefore considered to be strongly defined in the west and north east and moderately strongly defined in the ‘recognisable and likely south. Removal of the Proposed Green Belt Site would represent a strong Resultant Green Belt boundary which rounds off the built form of Bawtry. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Strong

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 25 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large As Bawtry is identified as a Small Urban Area within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options version (July 2015) and a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan built-up areas. Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016), the Proposed Green Belt Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but it is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built up Area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The proposed Green Belt Site falls within a land gap between Bawtry and Harworth Bircotes; a settlement which at its closest point is approximately 800m from the Proposed Green Belt Site. This To prevent Green Belt Site in resisting separation is supported by the West Wood which exists to the west of the Proposed Green Belt site, no direct access between settlements from the site and limited views between settlements. In neighbouring development that would result in addition, the modern residential built form off Westwood Road adjoins the extent of the Local Authority boundary and means that there is no additional role for the Green Belt in preventing towns from merging, coalescence or significant neighbouring towns from merging into one another. The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore makes no discernable contribution to separation. merging into erosion, both physical or visually of a Score: 0 one another. valued gap between neighbouring settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed There are no access tracks within the Proposed Green Belt site, and therefore, there are no opportunities for ribbon development. Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Score: 0 development which would otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area is dominated by the Bawtry Hall Gardens and Fish Pond Wood, with relatively limited public access through the site. The landscape To assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and character of the Green Belt is therefore dominated by the parklands associated with the Grade II* listed Bawtry Hall. Whilst the General Area is relatively flat, views are contained by the dense safeguarding features important to the appreciation woodlands. the of the countryside to change. The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) does not identify the Green Belt land within the General Area as falling within a Character Area. countryside from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a small area of Green Belt to the south west of the General Area, beyond the modern residential development, encroachment. which comprises an area of scrubland that appears to be used as an informal footpath. Aside from a number of small trees along the Westwood Road, the Site does not include any distinctive components. Development within this area would have a limited effect on views and a local impact on physical landform, and therefore the Green Belt within this site is considered to be relatively tolerant of change. The Proposed Green Belt Site contains land which is of low sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 1 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these There is no built form within the General Area which should mean that the General Area displays a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. However, as a result of the scrubland which exists on the site, features within the Proposed Green the Green Belt at this point is not considered to be ‘unspoilt’. Belt Site have been impacted by The Green Belt within the General Area is therefore considered to be more representative of a ‘Strong Rural Character’. ‘Encroachment’. Score: 4 Purpose 4: Purpose 4a: Extent to which the The South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008) identifies that Bawtry as a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’ that shows clear evidence for comprehensive planning of burgage plots To preserve Proposed Green Belt Site has a role in 12th centuries, which were located specifically around the town’s High Street and Central Market Place. Whilst Bawtry’s historic core remains relatively intact, the Green Belt within the Proposed the setting in supporting the character of the Green Belt site is separated from the historic core (as defined on the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854)) by modern built form. The Conservation Area (2007, update and special Historic Town or Place within the 2013) appraisal confirms that the General Area is formed by Key Green Space, Reed Bed and Woodlands. The Conservation Area contains the Grade II* Bawtry Hall. The Conservation Area character of Borough. appraisal (2007) identifies that the Conservation Area could be extended to include the parks and gardens associated with Bawtry Hall. In any case, it is also noted that greenery makes a positive historic contribution to the setting of the Conservation Area. However, given the level of modern built form, it is considered that the Proposed Green Belt site is therefore separated from the historic core by towns. post WWII development. Harworth Bircotes is not considered to represent a ‘historic town’ within the Local Interpretation of Purpose 4 and therefore the Green Belt at this location does not preserve the setting or special character of this settlement Score: 2 Purpose 4b: Extent to which the The historic core is focused around the town’s High Street and Central Market Place, however the Proposed Green Belt site is separated from the Green Belt at this location as a result of the modern Proposed Green Belt Site has a role built form along West Wood Road. Views to the historic core from the Proposed Green Belt site are therefore constrained by modern built form and dense areas of woodland. There are no views to in supporting the views into and out the historic core. of the historic core. Score: 1 Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a specific role in supporting urban regeneration of the Regeneration Priority Area. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 1 recycling of derelict and other urban land’.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 26 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The existing Green Belt General Area is considered to perform weakly when assessed against the extent to which it checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area and in the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration. The General Area is considered to contain Green Belt which is of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment and a strong role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry. The General Area makes no discernable role in contributing to separation. The proposed Green Belt boundary features are therefore considered to be strongly defined in the west and north east and moderately strongly defined in the south. Removal of the Proposed Green Belt Site would represent a strong Resultant Green Belt boundary which rounds off the built form of Bawtry. Given the scale and the distinctly separate nature of the Proposed Green Belt Site from the wider General Area, the Proposed Site performs somewhat differently to the wider General Area. The Proposed Green Belt site is considered to contain land which is of low sensitivity to encroachment, however which contains no built form. The Proposed Green Belt Site has a weak role in preserving the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, makes no discernable contribution to preventing neighbouring towns from merging and has a limited role in preserving the setting of the historic core of Bawtry. The Green Belt at this location is not considered to have a role in supporting urban regeneration.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 27 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

10 Bawtry 146: Tickhill Road, Bawtry

Proposed Green Belt 146 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Tickhill Road, Bawtry Site Size 13.5 Hectares Location of Site and The proposed Green Belt site is adjoined to the western edge of Bawtry. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing South 6 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within South 6, a large General Area to the north-western edge of Bawtry and to the south of New Rossington. Bawtry is a Smaller Urban Area and New Rossington is a Large Urban Area Assessment Area. Therefore the Green Belt at this location is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built-up Area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • South 6 supports several land gaps including between Bawtry and New Rossington; New Rossington and Tickhill and New Rossington and Harworth Bircotes. On balance, the General Area supports a less essential land gap (Purpose 2, Score 1). The A631 and B6463 are two access tracks which connect New Rossington, Bawtry and Tickhill. The Green Belt has a mixed role in resisting ribbon development but in the west and north of Bawtry there are no instances of ribbon development. Overall, the existing Green Belt boundary has predominantly resisted development (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The sensitivity of the General Area to development is mixed and the land adjoining Bawtry is considered to be very open with very large field patterns. In the south east of the General Area, there are no distinctive features but development would be in conflict with the open and relatively flat landform. The General Area is considered to have a moderate to high sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The Green Belt in South 6 contains 1.96% built form and the area displays a mixed character: whilst the central, western and south-western portions of the Green Belt display a strong rural character, the areas of enclosure along Stripe Road and nearest the spoil heap do result in a moderate rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 4). • Both Tickhill and Bawtry are considered to have complex historic cores, but for Green Belt land within this General Area both are separated from the designation by post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). Views towards the historic core of Bawtry are relatively limited by a copse of woodland or infrastructure. However, there are moderate views to the historic core of Tickhill with expansive south-western views towards the historic skyline. Overall, there are views to the historic core of Tickhill, but limited towards Bawtry (Purpose 4b, Score 3). • The General Area is contiguous with the Regeneration Priority Area of Rossington and is therefore considered to be directing development towards brownfield and derelict land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is defined by a stepped and angular area of residential built form. This is particularly is stepped to the north of Yew Tree Drive. Belt Boundary represent The proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined to the north by the strongly defined and likely to be durable Martin Lane, in the west by a weakly defined field boundary which contains occasional trees and larger shrubs a ‘boundary which is particularly further to the south. The proposed Green Belt boundary to the south would be defined by Tickhill Road. Whilst release of the site would form an extension to the west of Bawtry, the Resultant Green Belt boundary ‘recognisable and likely would be mixed in strength: strong to the north and south, and weak to the west. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength, strong to the north and south and weak to the west

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 28 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large As Bawtry is identified as a Small Urban Area within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options version (July 2015) and a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan built-up areas. Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016), the Proposed Green Belt Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but it is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built up Area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Site forms part of a land gap between Bawtry and Tickhill. These settlements are identified as tertiary settlements, or ‘Smaller Urban Areas’ within the Doncaster Draft Local Plan prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Issues and Options (2015) or ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Given the land gap between these settlements is neighbouring development that would result in almost 4.5km, there is a strong sense of separation which is enforced by a slightly undulating landscape and dense area of woodland. Views between the settlement and the Proposed Site are therefore towns from merging, coalescence or significant restricted. The Green Belt at this location therefore falls within and maintains a less essential land gap between Bawtry and Tickhill, where the gap is of a sufficient scale with a sufficient perception merging into erosion, both physical or visually of of separation, relative to the size of the settlements that development is unlikely to result in merging. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring The Proposed Site also forms part of a land gap between Bawtry and Harworth Bircotes. Whilst the land gap between these settlements is relatively narrow, there is a strong perception of separation settlements within the District. created by an undulating landscape which limits direct views between the Proposed Site and the settlement of Harworth Bircotes. The Green Belt at this location therefore falls within and maintains largely essential land gap between Bawtry and Harworth Bircotes, where the overall openness and scale of the gap is important to preserving neighbouring towns from merging, but where limited development may be possible. Score: 3 (overall) Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The A631 to the south of the proposed site connects Bawtry, Tickhill and Harworth Bircotes. There have been no instances of ribbon development and therefore the existing Green Belt boundary is Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon considered to have strongly resisted ribbon development which could have perceptibly reduced separation between Bawtry and Harworth Bircotes in particular. development which would Score: 5 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: Within the Stage 1 Assessment, the character of the South 6 General Area was considered to be mixed. In the south east surrounding Bawtry, the General Area assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and was considered to contain very large open fields from which there were notable long-distance views. safeguarding features important to the The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identified that the South 6 General Area surrounding Bawtry falls predominantly within H1. The H1 Bawtry to Finningley Sandland Heaths and the appreciation of the countryside to Farmland which is considered to be of moderate quality and fairly distinctive with arable areas in good condition and few intrusive elements. There is a geometric form to many landscape elements, countryside change. including a railway line, straight edged fields and roads. from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: In the south east of the General Area, and indeed within the Proposed Green Belt Site, land is considered to be very open, with very large irregular fields encroachment. patterns. The slightly undulating nature of the area does means that views beyond the woodland to the north east and east or and towards other settlements are somewhat limited. Although there are no distinctive features within the area, development would be in conflict with the open and relatively flat landform. Land is considered to be in a fair condition with a limited tolerance to change and therefore land within the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderate-high sensitivity encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these There is 0% built form within the Proposed Green Belt site and therefore the Site is considered to display a strong unspoilt rural character. landscape features within the Score: 5 Proposed Green Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the The South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008) identifies that Bawtry as a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’ shows clear evidence for comprehensive planning of burgage plots in preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role 12th centuries, which were located specifically around the town’s High Street and Central Market Place. Whilst Bawtry’s historic core remains relatively intact, the Green Belt within the Proposed setting and in supporting the character of the Green Belt site is separated from the historic core (as defined on the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854)) by late 20th Century suburban housing. The Green Belt is special Historic Town or Place within the therefore separated from the historic core by post WWII development. character of Borough. Score: 2 historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Although the historic core is located along Tickhill Road within the centre of the Bawtry settlement, views towards the historic core of Bawtry are relatively limited by modern built form and by a

Proposed Green Belt Site has a role copse of woodland just beyond the western development extent of Bawtry. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a specific role in supporting urban regeneration of a Regeneration Priority Area. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 1 recycling of derelict and other urban land’.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 29 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The existing Green Belt General Area is considered to perform weakly when assessed against the extent to which it checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area and has a mixed role in the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration. The General Area is considered to contain Green Belt which is of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment and a moderate role in preserving the setting and special character of the historic core of Bawtry. The General Area also has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The Proposed Green Belt site boundaries are mixed in strength: strong to the north and south, and weaker to the west. The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in a similar manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. The Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, has a moderately-weak role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, and has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. In addition, the Green Belt at this location is not considered to have a role in assisting urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to have a strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, with no built form encroaching into the area and Site which contains features that are of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 30 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

11 Bawtry 786: South of Cockhill Close, Bawtry

Proposed Green Belt 786 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name South of Cockhill Close, Bawtry Site Size 0.3 Hectares Location of Site and The proposed Green Belt site is adjoins the south eastern boundary with Bawtry relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Bawtry 3 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Bawtry 3 General Area. The General Area exists to the south eastern edge of the settlement of Bawtry and is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not considered in Area Assessment close proximity to any large built up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • and Scaftworth are identified as ‘all other settlements’ within the Bassetlaw Core Strategy (2011) and exist approximately 1.7km to the south east of Bawtry; there are no views of either settlement as a result of dense areas of vegetation surrounding the General Area which create a sense of enclosure. The General Area therefore supports a less essential gap where development is unlikely to reduce the physical, visual and perceptual separation between settlements (Purpose 2a, Score 1). The Great North Road and Cock Hill Lane run adjacent to the General Area, where there are no instances of ribbon development along Cock Hill Lane. There are sports facilities located to the south of the local authority administrative boundary and therefore the existing Green Belt boundary has resisted development in part (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • Given the built form to the north and sports facility to the south, development in this location would have a local impact on the physical landform and scale of the landscape. Due to the enclosed nature of the area, development would have a limited effect on views, thus this General Area contains Green Belt that has low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 2). Bawtry 3 contains 0% built form which is identified as having a Strong Unspoilt Rural Character. However, the Green Belt at this location is influenced by residential built form to the north, and built form to the south, and thus is considered to display a strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 4). • Bawtry has a complex historic core and the General Area is adjacent to the historic core of Bawtry. Bawtry 3 specifically is considered to represent a Key Green Space which supports the Conservation Area (Purpose 4a, Score 5). Despite being identified as a Key Green Space, due to the enclosed nature of the General Area, there are no strong views into the historic core or across to Bawtry Hall (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • Bawtry is not identified as a Regeneration Priority Area within Doncaster. Therefore, the Green Belt at this location does not have a specific role in supporting urban regeneration (Purpose 5, Score 1). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is defined by built form along Cock Hill Lane, which is a strongly defined feature. Belt Boundary represent The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by a strongly defined wooded corridor to the west, south and east of the site. These boundaries are considered to be strong, recognisable and likely to be permanent. Release a ‘boundary which is of the Proposed Green Belt site at this location would however result in an angular area of built form that would protrude beyond the existing extent of Bawtry. Therefore, whilst the boundary features are considered to be ‘recognisable and likely strong, the Resultant Green Belt boundary is considered to be angular. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Strong

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 31 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large As Bawtry is identified as a Small Urban Area within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options version (July 2015) and a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan: Homes and built-up areas. Settlements (March 2016), the Proposed Green Belt Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but it is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built up Area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The nearest settlement to Bawtry is Bircotes, a third tier settlement in Bassetlaw, however, the Proposed Green Belt Site does not support this land gap due to the orientation of the site. Scrooby and prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Scaftworth are identified as ‘all other settlements’ within the Bassetlaw Core Strategy (2011) and exist approximately 1.7km to the south east of Bawtry. This land gap is not only relatively wide neighbouring development that would result in compared to the size of the settlements, but as a result of higher levels of enclosure within the Site, there are no views to either settlement. towns from merging, coalescence or significant The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore supports a less essential gap between settlements. Although the Site is located at the south-eastern edge of the Doncaster Local Authority Green Belt, it does merging into erosion, both physical or visually of support a less essential gap between defined ‘all other settlements’ within Bassetlaw where development is unlikely to reduce the physical, visual and perceptual separation between settlements. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 1 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed Whilst the A638 exists beyond the Proposed Green Belt Site in the west, there are no access tracks within the Proposed Green Belt site, and therefore, there are no opportunities for ribbon Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon development. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: With regard to the wider General Area, the character of the landscape is considered to be wooded, enclosed and semi-urban. The topography is flat and assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and drainage is provided by a stream at the south edge of the General Area. Cock Lane provides the only access through the area and there are no other public rights of way passing through the area. safeguarding features important to the The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the General Area as H2 Blaxton to Stainforth Sandland Heaths and Farmland. The landscape character of H2 is described as having the appreciation of the countryside to medium to large scale intensive arable farmland with rectangular fields and fragmented and missing hedge boundaries and frequently lined with bracken. There are scattered farms with diversifying countryside change. and recreational land uses, a network of larger drains and smaller wet ditches and occasional mixed deciduous and coniferous woodlands. from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt site is bordered by a dense copse of woodland which is considered to be a component that is not easily replaced or substituted. The encroachment. Site also exists in close proximity to the River Idle Washlands SSSI – further investigatory work would be necessary to determine the implications of any site release at this location. Land at this at this location is considered to be in a generally fair-good condition. However, given the built form to the north of the site and sports facility to the south, development within this Proposed Site would have a local impact on physical landform and scale of the landscape. Due to the enclosed nature of the area, development would have a limited effect on views. The Proposed Site is considered to contain features which are of a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain 0.0% built form, which would be representative of an ‘unspoilt rural character’. However given the levels of containment and built form to the features within the Proposed Green north and south of the site, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be more representative of a Strong Rural Character. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the The South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008) identifies that Bawtry shows clear evidence for comprehensive planning of burgage plots in 12th centuries, which were located preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role specifically around the town’s High Street and Central Market Place. setting and in supporting the character of the The Conservation Area Appraisal identifies that the land within the Proposed Green Belt site is separated by 1800-1850 built form through only a natural Green Space boundary. This area is special Historic Town or Place within the identified as a positive gateway for Bawtry and the Proposed Green Belt site is itself is identified a Key Green Space which supports the Conservation Area. Alongside the land to west, the Proposed character of Borough. Green Belt Site is therefore adjacent to the historic core of Bawtry and represents a Key Green Space which supports the Conservation Area. historic towns. Further heritage impact assessment work would be necessary to understand the implications of the Proposed Site on the Conservation Area.

Score: 5 Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Despite the Proposed Green Belt Site forming part of a Key Green Space associated with the Bawtry Conservation Area, there are no views into or out of the historic core as a result of dense areas of Proposed Green Belt Site has a role woodland surrounding the Proposed Site. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Bawtry is not identified as a Regeneration Priority Area within Doncaster. Therefore, the Green Belt at this location does not have a specific role in supporting urban regeneration. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 1 recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Summary The existing Green Belt General Area is considered to perform weakly when assessed against the extent to which it checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area and in the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration. The General Area is considered to contain Green Belt which is of low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment and is considered to display a strong rural character. The General Area forms part of Key

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 32 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Green Space associated with the Conservation Area and therefore the area plays a strong role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, however views to features within the historic core are very limited. The General Area has a weak role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The proposed Green Belt boundary features are considered to be strong, however, the Resultant Green Belt boundary is considered to be angular and protrude to the south of Bawtry. The Proposed Green Belt site performs in largely the same manner as the General Area; it is considered to be performing a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, a weak role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and in the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderately strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment: the Site contains features which area of moderate sensitivity to encroachment, but no ‘encroachment’ has taken place. The Green Belt at this location plays a strong role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, however views to features within the historic core are very limited.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 33 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

12 Bawtry 873: Site A, Land at Martin Common Farm, Bawtry

Proposed Green Belt 873 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Site A, Land at Martin Common Farm Bawtry Site Size 8.6 Hectares Location of Site and The proposed Green Belt site is adjoins the north western boundary of Bawtry. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing South 6 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within South 6, a large General Area to the north-western edge of Bawtry and to the south of New Rossington. Bawtry is a Smaller Urban Area and New Rossington is a Large Urban Area Assessment Area. Therefore the Green Belt at this location is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built-up Area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • South 6 supports several land gaps including between Bawtry and New Rossington; New Rossington and Tickhill and New Rossington and Harworth Bircotes. On balance, the General Area supports a less essential land gap (Purpose 2, Score 1). The A631 and B6463 are two access tracks which connect New Rossington, Bawtry and Tickhill. The Green Belt has a mixed role in resisting ribbon development but in the west and north of Bawtry there are no instances of ribbon development. Overall, the existing Green Belt boundary has predominantly resisted development (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The sensitivity of the General Area to development is mixed and the land adjoining Bawtry is considered to be very open with very large field patterns. In the south east of the General Area, there are no distinctive features but development would be in conflict with the open and relatively flat landform. The General Area is considered to have a moderate to high sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The Green Belt in South 6 contains 1.96% built form and the area displays a mixed character: whilst the central, western and south-western portions of the Green Belt display a strong rural character, the areas of enclosure along Stripe Road and nearest the spoil heap do result in a moderate rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 4). • Both Tickhill and Bawtry are considered to have complex historic cores, but for Green Belt land within this General Area both are separated from the designation by post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). Views towards the historic core of Bawtry are relatively limited by a copse of woodland or infrastructure. However, there are moderate views to the historic core of Tickhill with expansive south-western views towards the historic skyline. Overall, there are views to the historic core of Tickhill, but limited towards Bawtry (Purpose 4b, Score 3). • The General Area is contiguous with the Regeneration Priority Area of Rossington and is therefore considered to be directing development towards brownfield and derelict land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is defined by a very stepped and angular area of residential built form associated with Grange Avenue and angular boundary associated with John Hudson Trailers. The existing Belt Boundary represent Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be weakly defined by very angular, indented and inconsistent built form. a ‘boundary which is The proposed Green Belt boundary would be weakly defined by a field boundary supported by moderately dense field boundaries to the west, the A639 Great North Road in the east which represents a strongly defined Green ‘recognisable and likely Belt feature and a weakly defined boundary in the north which is based on no infrastructure or natural boundaries. Whilst release of the Proposed Green Belt site would result in a northern extension to Bawtry, the Proposed to be permanent’ Green Belt boundary features, particularly to the north, are therefore considered to be weak. Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak, strong to the east and weak to the north and west

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 34 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large As Bawtry is identified as a Small Urban Area within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options version (July 2015) and a ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan built-up areas. Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016), the Proposed Green Belt Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but it is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built up Area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Site forms part of a land gap between Bawtry and New Rossington. Bawtry was identified as a ‘Smaller Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Draft Local Plan Issues and Options (2015) prevent Green Belt Site in resisting or ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016), whilst New Rossington was identified as a ‘Large Urban Area’ within the Issues neighbouring development that would result in and Options and a ‘Main Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). The land gap between Bawtry and New Rossington is approximately towns from merging, coalescence or significant 3.8km and contains the densely forested Bawtry Forest. Based on the scale of the land gap, the slightly-undulating topography and the visually-impermeable nature of Bawtry Forest, the Proposed merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Green Belt site falls within and maintains supports a less essential gap which is of a sufficient scale that development would not result in merging between settlements one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 1 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The A638 Great North Road exists to the east of the Proposed Site and connects Bawtry to Rossington. There have been no instances of Ribbon Development along this route and therefore the Green Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Belt at this location has had a strong role in resisting ribbon development towards Rossington in the north. development which would Score: 5 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: Within the Stage 1 Assessment, the character of the South 6 General Area was considered to be mixed. In the south east surrounding Bawtry, the General Area assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and was considered to contain very large open fields from which there were notable long-distance views. safeguarding features important to the The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identified that the South 6 General Area surrounding Bawtry falls predominantly within H1 Character Area. The H1 Bawtry to Finningley the appreciation of the countryside to Sandland Heaths and Farmland which is considered to be of moderate quality and fairly distinctive with arable areas in good condition and few intrusive elements. There is a geometric form to many countryside change. landscape elements, including a railway line, straight edged fields and roads. from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: In the south east of the General Area, and indeed within the Proposed Green Belt Site, land is considered to be very open, with a very large irregular field encroachment. patterns. The slightly undulating nature of the area does mean that views beyond the blocks of woodland or towards other settlements in the west and north are limited. Although there are no distinctive features within the Site, development would be in conflict with the open and relatively flat landform. Although the site is influenced by the urban edge, land is considered to be in a fair condition with a limited tolerance to change and therefore land within the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderate to high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these There is 0% built form within the Proposed Green Belt site and therefore the Site is considered to display a strong unspoilt rural character. landscape features within the Score: 5 Proposed Green Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the The South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008) identifies that Bawtry as a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’ and shows clear evidence for comprehensive planning of burgage plots preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role in 12th centuries, which were located specifically around the town’s High Street and Central Market Place. Whilst Bawtry’s historic core remains relatively intact, the Green Belt within the Proposed setting and in supporting the character of the Green Belt site is separated from the historic core (as defined on the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854)) by late 20th Century suburban housing. The Green Belt is special Historic Town or Place within the therefore separated from the historic core by post WWII development. character of Borough. Score: 2 historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Although the historic core is located along the Great North Road further to the south, views towards the historic core of Bawtry from the Proposed Site are limited by modern built form and the

Proposed Green Belt Site has a role curvature of the Great North Road which limits views to the historic core. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt As Rossington is located far to the north of the site, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a specific role in supporting urban regeneration of the Regeneration Priority Area. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 1 recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Summary The existing Green Belt General Area is considered to perform weakly when assessed against the extent to which it checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area and has a mixed role in the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration. The General Area is considered to contain Green Belt which is of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment and a moderate role in preserving the setting and special character of the historic core of Bawtry. The General Area also has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The Proposed Green Belt site boundaries are considered to be weakly defined in the north and west.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 35 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in a similar manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. The Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, has a moderately-weak role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, and has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging by resisting ribbon development. The Green Belt at this location is not considered to have a role in assisting urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land, however the Site contains land which is considered to have a strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 36 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

13 Bawtry 874: Site B (Safeguarded), Land at Martin Common Farm, Bawtry

Proposed Green Belt 874 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Site B, Land at Martin Common Farm Bawtry Site Size 14.8 Hectares Location of Site and The proposed Green Belt site is adjoins the north western boundary of Bawtry. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing South 6 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within South 6, a large General Area to the north-western edge of Bawtry and to the south of New Rossington. Bawtry is a Smaller Urban Area and New Rossington is a Large Urban Area Assessment Area. Therefore the Green Belt at this location is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built-up Area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • South 6 supports several land gaps including between Bawtry and New Rossington; New Rossington and Tickhill and New Rossington and Harworth Bircotes. On balance, the General Area supports a less essential land gap (Purpose 2, Score 1). The A631 and B6463 are two access tracks which connect New Rossington, Bawtry and Tickhill. The Green Belt has a mixed role in resisting ribbon development but in the west and north of Bawtry there are no instances of ribbon development. Overall, the existing Green Belt boundary has predominantly resisted development (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The sensitivity of the General Area to development is mixed and the land adjoining Bawtry is considered to be very open with very large field patterns. In the south east of the General Area, there are no distinctive features but development would be in conflict with the open and relatively flat landform. The General Area is considered to have a moderate to high sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The Green Belt in South 6 contains 1.96% built form and the area displays a mixed character: whilst the central, western and south-western portions of the Green Belt display a strong rural character, the areas of enclosure along Stripe Road and nearest the spoil heap do result in a moderate rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 4). • Both Tickhill and Bawtry are considered to have complex historic cores, but for Green Belt land within this General Area both are separated from the designation by post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). Views towards the historic core of Bawtry are relatively limited by a copse of woodland or infrastructure. However, there are moderate views to the historic core of Tickhill with expansive south-western views towards the historic skyline. Overall, there are views to the historic core of Tickhill, but limited towards Bawtry (Purpose 4b, Score 3). • The General Area is contiguous with the Regeneration Priority Area of Rossington and is therefore considered to be directing development towards brownfield and derelict land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is defined by the Great North Road in the east, which is considered to be a strongly defined Green Belt boundary. Given the isolated nature of the site, there are no other Green Belt Boundary represent Belt boundaries at this location. a ‘boundary which is The proposed Green Belt boundary would be weakly defined by a moderately dense field boundary to the west; the A639 Great North Road in the east which represents a strongly defined Green Belt feature; the Martin Grange ‘recognisable and likely Farm Lane in the north which has been identified as an adopted road by DMBC and therefore is considered to be a recognisable and likely to be permanent feature; and a weakly defined boundary in the south which is based on to be permanent’

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 37 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

no infrastructure or natural boundaries. In isolation, the Proposed Green Belt site would represent a remote site and an angular area of built form. The Proposed Green Belt boundary features are considered to be weak, and would create a Resultant Green Belt boundary that is formed by weak boundary features and which results in an angular and isolated area of built form. Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak (strong to the east and north, and weaker to the west and south) Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large As Bawtry is identified as a Small Urban Area within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options version (July 2015) and a ‘Service Town and Village’ within Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: built-up areas. Homes and Settlements (March 2016), the Proposed Green Belt Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but it is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built up Area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Site forms part of a land gap between Bawtry and New Rossington. Bawtry was identified as a ‘Smaller Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Draft Local Plan Issues and Options (2015) prevent Green Belt Site in resisting or ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016), whilst New Rossington was identified as a ‘Large Urban Area’ within the Issues neighbouring development that would result in and Options and a ‘Main Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). The land gap between Bawtry and New Rossington is approximately towns from merging, coalescence or significant 3.8km and contains the densely forested Bawtry Forest. Based on the scale of the land gap, the slightly-undulating topography and the visually-impermeable nature of Bawtry Forest, the Proposed merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Green Belt Site is considered to fall within and maintain a less essential gap which is of a sufficient scale that development at this location would not result in merging between settlements one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 1 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The A638 Great North Road exists to the east of the Proposed Site and connects Bawtry to Rossington. There have been no instances of Ribbon Development along this route and therefore the Green Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Belt at this location has had a strong role in resisting ribbon development towards Rossington in the north. development which would Score: 5 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: Within the Stage 1 Assessment, the character of the South 6 General Area was considered to be mixed. In the south east surrounding Bawtry, the General Area assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and was considered to contain very large open fields from which there were notable long-distance views. safeguarding features important to the The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identified that South 6 surrounding Bawtry falls predominantly within H1 Character Area. The H1 Bawtry to Finningley Sandland Heaths and the appreciation of the countryside to Farmland is considered to be of moderate quality and fairly distinctive with arable areas in good condition and few intrusive elements. There is geometric form to many landscape elements, including countryside change. a railway line, straight edged fields and roads. from Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: In the south east of the General Area, and indeed within the Proposed Green Belt Site, land is considered to be very open, with very large field patterns. The encroachment. slightly undulating nature of the area does mean that views beyond the blocks of woodland or towards other settlements in the north and west are limited. Although there are no distinctive features within the Site, development would be in conflict with the open and relatively flat landform. Land is considered to be in a fair condition with a limited tolerance to change and therefore land within the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderate to high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these There is 0% built form within the Proposed Green Belt site and therefore the Site is considered to display a strong unspoilt rural character. features within the Proposed Green Score: 5 Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the The South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008) identifies that Bawtry has a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’ and shows clear evidence for comprehensive planning of burgage preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role plots in 12th centuries, which were located specifically around the town’s High Street and Central Market Place. Whilst Bawtry’s historic core remains relatively intact, the Green Belt within the setting and in supporting the character of the Proposed Green Belt site is separated from the historic core (as defined on the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854)) by late 20th Century suburban housing. The Green special Historic Town or Place within the Belt is therefore separated from the historic core by post WWII development. character of Borough. Score: 2 historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Although the historic core is located along the Great North Road further to the south, views towards the historic core of Bawtry from the Proposed Site are limited by modern built form and the

Proposed Green Belt Site has a role curvature of the Great North Road which limits any views to the historic core. in supporting the views into and out Views may be possible from along Martin Grange Farm towards key features, however these would be constrained by moderate scale detractors such as post WWI development. of the historic core. Score: 1 Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt As Rossington is located far to the north of the site, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a specific role in supporting urban regeneration of the Regeneration Priority Area. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 1 recycling of derelict and other urban land’.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 38 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The existing Green Belt General Area is considered to perform weakly when assessed against the extent to which it checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area and has a mixed role in the extent to which the Green Belt assists in supporting regeneration. The General Area is considered to contain Green Belt which is of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment and a moderate role in preserving the setting and special character of the historic core of Bawtry. The General Area also has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The Proposed Green Belt site boundaries are considered to be weakly defined in the south and west. The Proposed Green Belt site largely performs in a similar manner to the wider Green Belt General Area. The Proposed Site performs weakly when assessed against the extent to which the Green Belt checks the unrestricted sprawl of a large-built up area, has a moderately-weak role in preserving the setting and special character of Bawtry, and has a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging through resisting ribbon development The Green Belt at this location is not considered to have a role in assisting urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land, however, the Proposed Site does have a strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 39 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

14 Carcroft and Skellow 042: Land to the rear of Skellow Hall

Proposed Green Belt 042 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land to the rear of Skellow Hall Site Size 3 Hectares Location of Site and The Proposed Green Belt site exists to the south of Carcroft and Skellow which is identified as ‘Service Town relationships with inset and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlement (March 2016) settlement

General Area containing Carcroft 1 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The General Area exists to the south of Carcroft, which is identified as a Small Urban Area in the Doncaster Core Strategy or a Service Town and Village within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Area Assessment Settlement (March 2016). The Green Belt at this location is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not in close proximity to any large built up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • Carcroft 1 supports a largely essential gap between the Small Urban Area of Carcroft and Skellow and the Large Urban Area of Adwick le Street. Although the land gap is relatively narrow there is sufficient visual and perceptual separation that some development would not result in the merging, coalescence or significant erosion of a valued gap (Purpose 2a, Score 3). There are no instances of ribbon development, but there are no opportunities for ribbon development within the General Area (Purpose 2b, Score 0). • The General Area contains no distinctive components or features which are considered to be irreplaceable or rare. Land in this location is in poor to fair condition; there was evidence of fly-tipping and open storage along Ings Lane. Development within the Green Belt could have a negative impact on the physical landforms and views, and the area is considered to have a low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 2). The General Area contains 0.23% built form which would indicate a strong rural character. However, there is influence from the operational railway line and employment site to the east which means the area reflects is fundamentally more characteristic of a moderately strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • Neither Adwick le Street nor Carcroft are considered to be historic cores, therefore this General Area is not considered to support the setting of a historic town or supports views towards the historic core (Purposes 4a and 4b, Score 1). • The General Area is considered to be contiguous with the Regeneration Area of Carcroft and Skellow (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The General Area exists to the south of Carcroft and north of Adwick le Street. The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by the stepped extent of residential built form along the B1220 to the north. The existing Green Belt Belt Boundary represent boundary is therefore considered to be angular and indented. a ‘boundary which is Apart from a weakly defined indented area to the north west of the site which is not based on any physical features, the Proposed Green Belt Site boundary is defined on all sides by a dense and recognisable tree boundary, ‘recognisable and likely which is likely to be permanent. However, if the Proposed Green Belt site was removed from the Green Belt, the resultant boundary to the south of Carcroft would be acutely angular, indented and stepped. Release of the to be permanent’ Proposed Green Belt site would therefore result in a boundary which is weak, irregular and inconsistent. Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength Resultant Boundary to the south of Carcroft would be increasingly stepped and irregular

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 40 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site is connected to the ‘Main Town’ of Adwick le Street and the ‘Service Towns and Villages’ of Carcroft and Skellow. The Green Belt at this location is connected to the built-up areas. South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed Alongside Adwick le Street 1, 2 and 3, the land within Carcroft 1 and indeed the Proposed Green Belt Site, protects a land gap between the Small Urban Area of Carcroft and Skellow (now identified To prevent Green Belt Site in resisting as a ‘Service Town and Village’) and the Large Urban Area of Adwick Le Street (now identified as a ‘Main Town’ as identified within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlement neighbouring development that would result in (March 2016). towns from merging, coalescence or significant The land gap between these settlements is approximately 1.7km and made up by arable fields, with the marshland associated with Skellow Ings and Old Ea Beck within the central area. There are a merging into erosion, both physical or visually of a number of mature trees associated with the Skellow Ings area. In addition to these features, the topography of the former mine does mean that views between Carcroft and Skellow and the ‘Large one another. valued gap between neighbouring Urban Area’ of Adwick le Street to the south east are somewhat limited. There is no direct access through this Proposed Site between the two settlements. settlements within the District. Based on the scale of the Proposed Site and lack of access between settlements, release of this land from the Green Belt would not perceptually or visually reduce the perception of separation between these two settlements. This separation would also be maintained by the agricultural fields to the south of the Proposed Green Belt site. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site would ensure that the largely essential gap between these settlements is retained. Score: 3 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed As there is no access through the Proposed Green Belt site between Carcroft and Skellow, and Adwick le Street, there are no opportunities for the Proposed Green Belt site to contribute towards Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon ribbon development. development which would otherwise Score: 0 have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area contains four large agricultural fields, and a remediated spoil heap in the east. The topography within the area is mixed: slightly To assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and undulating in the west, with artificially influenced landform associated with the spoil heap in the east. Vegetation is also mixed: whilst there are limited hedgerows, there are a number of more mature safeguarding features important to the appreciation trees along Ings Lane and scrubland associated with former Carcroft Mine in the east. To the northern edge of Ings Lane there is a storage site within the Green Belt. the of the countryside to change. The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the General Area as the Hampole Limestone River Valley (D2). This area is characterised by irregular pattern of small to large scale countryside gently sloping arable fields, meandering and tree-lined streams and major transport corridors (including the A1 and railway line). The area to the east of the Character Area, land which falls within from the General Area, is considered to be undeveloped and have a role in separating two large settlements, however it is slightly more diverse with a restored spoil heap. encroachment. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains a number of large trees and components which are not considered to be easily replaced. High levels of containment do mean that development would not be in conflict with the landform, scale or pattern of the area or impact on wider views across the area. However development at this location could be considered to have an impact upon vulnerable landscape features such as the mature trees and the Conservation Area in the north. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to contain features of a moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form and is therefore considered to be representative of a ‘Strong unspoilt rural area’. However, as a result of the levels of containment and the features within the Proposed Green ‘urbanising features’ associated with the operational railway line just to the south, the Site is not considered to be characteristic of an ‘unspoilt’ area. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Neither Adwick le Street nor Carcroft are considered to be historic cores within the Stage 1 Green Belt methodology. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to support the setting To preserve Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or special character of a historic town. the setting in supporting the character of the However, the Skellow Buttercross Conservation Area exists directly to the north of the Proposed Site. Whilst this does not constitute a ‘Historic Town’ in the Local Interpretation of the Purpose, and special Historic Town or Place within the development at this location may have an impact on the Conservation Area. Further work will need to be undertaken to understand the implications of development on this designation. character of Borough. Score: 1 historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the There are no views towards a Historic Town Core. Proposed Green Belt Site has a role However, as above, the Skellow Buttercross Conservation Area exists directly to the north of the Proposed Site. Whilst this does not constitute a ‘Historic Town’ in the Local Interpretation of the in supporting the views into and out Purpose, development at this location may have an impact on the Conservation Area. Further work will need to be undertaken to understand the implications of development on this designation. of the historic core. Score: 1 Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt The Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected to and in close proximity with a Regeneration Priority Area, and therefore it is considered to be directing development towards brownfield Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the and derelict land within the development limits. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 3

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 41 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The Strategic Green Belt General Area of Carcroft 1 is considered to score moderately or weaker against the majority of Purposes of the Green Belt. Whilst the land at this location supports a largely essential land gap between settlements and is contiguous with a Regeneration Priority Area, the Green Belt at this location is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, nor considered to have strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt boundaries are strong in isolation, release of this Green Belt site would reduce the overall strength of the Resultant Green Belt boundary. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would be acutely angular, indented and stepped, and therefore would not represent a readily recognisable boundary. The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preventing the sprawl of a large built up area, a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a ‘Historic Town’ and only a moderate role in assisting in regeneration. The Site falls within and maintains a largely essential gap between Carcroft and Skellow and Adwick le Street. Owing to the level of mature trees within the area, the proximity to the conservation area and the high levels of containment, development at this location is considered to have a moderately strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 42 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

15 Carcroft and Skellow 145: Land at Skellow

Proposed Green Belt 145 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land at Skellow Site Size 7.1 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the south of Carcroft and Skellow. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Carcroft 3 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Carcroft 3 General Area, which exists to the south of Carcroft. Carcroft is a ‘Small Urban Area’ in the Local Plan Issues and Options (2015), or a ‘Service Town and Village’ Area Assessment within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016) and therefore the Green Belt is considered to be connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not in close proximity to any large built up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • Carcroft 3 protects a land gap between the Small Urban Area of Carcroft and Skellow and the Large Urban Area of Adwick Le Street. Overall, the General Area supports a largely essential gap where some development would not result in the merging, coalescence or significant erosion of a valued gap (Purpose 2a, Score 3). The Green Belt has resisted further ribbon development along the A1(M) at this location, which could reduce the perception of separation between Carcroft and Adwick Le Street. However, it is likely that ribbon development would have otherwise been prevented by the operational railway line (Purpose 2b, Score 5). • The General Area contains three large, irregular arable fields. In general, the Green Belt at this location contains few distinctive components and no components which are not considered to be easily replaced. The General Area therefore contains Green Belt which is of low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 2). The General Area contains almost no built form (0.78%) which indicates a strong rural character; however, the influence of an operational railway line and employment site means that the General Area is reflective of a moderately strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • Neither Adwick Le Street nor Carcroft are considered to represent ‘historic towns’ within the Local Interpretation of Purpose 4. Despite the General Area containing Cromwell's Batteries, the General Area is not considered to support the setting or special character of a historic town (Purpose 4a, Score 1). There are no views towards a ‘Historic Town’ (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • The General Area is considered to be contiguous with the Regeneration Area of Carcroft and Skellow (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by Hampole Balk Lane in the north and an indented area of angular built form along Howden Avenue. The existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be predominantly strong. Belt Boundary represent The proposed outer Green Belt boundary comprises field boundaries in the east and south west which are supported by a number of medium sized boundary trees, and a field boundary to the south. Both of these Proposed a ‘boundary which is Boundaries are weakly defined. Release of the Proposed Green Belt site would result in an angular area of residential built form along Hampole Balk Lane, which would be weaker than the existing Green Belt boundary. ‘recognisable and likely Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak to be permanent’

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 43 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the east of Carcroft and Skellow, which was identified as a ‘Small Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options version July built-up areas. 2015 and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016) Carcroft and Skellow is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within a land gap between the ‘Main Town’ of Adwick le Street and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ of Carcroft and Skellow. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting The land gap between these settlements is approximately 1.7km and is generally made up by strategic infrastructure and arable fields with the marshland associated with Skellow Ings and Old Ea neighbouring development that would result in Beck within the central area. There are a number of mature trees associated with the Skellow Ings area. The topography dips away towards the Old Ea Beck, before increasing in height towards towns from merging, coalescence or significant Adwick le Street. Whilst there is no public or vehicular access through these areas, the A1(M) does provide access between these settlements. In addition, views are possible towards the Redhouse merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Interchange Industrial Estate. Despite this, there is a clear perception of separation between these settlements, with multiple strategic infrastructure features reducing opportunities for future one another. a valued gap between neighbouring coalescence settlements within the District. In isolation, the Proposed Green Belt Site therefore falls within and maintains a largely essential gap, where there is sufficient physical, visual and perceptual separation that some development would not result in merging. However, should the land to the south of the railway line also be developed, the Green Belt within the Proposed Site would represent an essential gap along the A1(M). Score: 3 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The Great North Road and the A1(M) exists to the east of the site and link Carcroft in the north with Adwick le Street. Whilst there is some built form to the south of the existing Green Belt Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon boundary, this pre-dates the Green Belt designation. development which would Given the nature of the Proposed Green Belt site, development could contribute to ribbon development along the A1(M) which would perceptibly reduce the perception of separation along this access otherwise have resulted in the track. This would be particularly pronounced if land to the south of the railway line was also developed. reduction of perceived separation Score: 5 between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area contains three large, irregular arable fields. The topography of the General Area slopes away from the built form, towards Old Ea assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and Beck and The Skell. Vegetation is largely limited to arable fields, with a number of mature trees associated with the Beck. Views are possible towards the Brodsworth Industrial estate and towards safeguarding features important to the the passing traffic on the A1 (M). the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) is identified as the Hampole Limestone River Valley (D2). This area is characterised by an irregular pattern of small to large scale gently countryside change. sloping arable fields, meandering and tree-lined streams and major transport corridors (including the A1 and railway line). The area to the east of the Character Area, land which falls within the wider from General Area, is considered to be undeveloped and have a role in separating two large settlements. encroachment. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains agricultural fields with few distinctive components and components which are not considered to be easily replaced. Whilst there is almost no built form within the area, existing built form along Howden Avenue and the urbanising influences of the railway line and A1(M) would mean that development within the Site would not have an impact on key views across the area or be in conflict with the physical landform. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain land which is of a low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 2 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form, which means the Site should be categorised as a ‘strong unspoilt rural character’. However the urbanising influences in the area, including the features within the Proposed Green A1(M) and the operational railway line, does mean that the area does not display an ‘unspoilt’ character. The area is considered to be more strongly associated with a ‘Strong Rural Character’. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as these are not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Study or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as these are not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Study or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Given the indented and partially contained nature of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be contiguous with the Regeneration Priority Area of Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Carcroft/Skellow. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 4

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 44 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The General Area has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The General Area is considered to have a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location has a low-moderate sensitivity to encroachment and supports a moderately-strong rural character. The wider Green Belt General Area is considered to have a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging and a weak role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, as Adwick le Street is not considered to be a ‘Historic Town’ in the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (2008). The proposed outer Green Belt boundary comprises field boundaries in the east and south west which are supported by a number of medium sized boundary trees, and a field boundary to the south. Both of these Proposed Boundaries are weakly defined. Release of the Proposed Green Belt site would result in an angular area of residential built form along Hampole Balk Lane, which would be weaker than the existing Green Belt boundary. The Proposed Green Belt boundary has a similar role to the wider General Area when assessed against the local interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. The Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a ‘large built up area’, and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. The role of the Proposed Green Belt site in preventing neighbouring towns from merging would increase to an essential gap if development were to take place to the south of the railway line. The Proposed Site is considered to contain land which is of a low-moderate sensitivity to development, and which contains no built form. As Carcroft and Skellow is not considered to be a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of Purpose 4, the Proposed Green Belt Site has only a limited role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. However, as Carcroft and Skellow are identified as a Regeneration Priority Area, the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 45 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

16 Carcroft and Skellow 165: Land north of the A1, Skellow

Proposed Green Belt 165 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land North of the A1, Skellow Site Size 15.1 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the north of Skellow and Carcroft. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing North 4 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within the large North 4 General Area. This General Area exists to the north of Carcroft and Skellow and therefore, the Green Belt is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is Area Assessment not in close proximity to any large built-up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • North 4 supports a number of land gaps between Carcroft and Burghwallis; Carcroft and Owston; Askern, Norton and Campsall; and Askern and Sutton. On the whole, Green Belt within North 4 supports largely essential gaps between settlements, which means some development could take place away from access tracks with limited risk of merging (Purpose 2a, Score 3). There are also a number of instances of built form which extends along an access track but there are no instances of ribbon development extending beyond the Skellow or Carcroft boundary towards another inset Green Belt settlement. On balance, the existing Green Belt boundary has resisted ribbon development in part (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The character of the landscape is open, arable countryside and has a limited tolerance to change. Therefore the Green Belt at this location is considered to have moderate-high sensitivity to development (Purpose 3a, Score 4). North 4 contains the inset settlements of Norton, Campsall, Sutton, Owston and Burghwallis, and the General Area contains 2.05% built form. Although the character of the area is rural, the percentage of built form has a semi-urban character in part (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Askern, Carcroft, and Skellow do not have a historic town or a complex historic core. Campsall has a strong historic character but is not a historic town (Purpose 4a, Score 1). There are also no views towards the core of a ‘Historic Town’ (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • North 4 is connected to Askern, Carcroft and Skellow which are Regeneration Priority Areas and the existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be contiguous with these Regeneration Priority Areas (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by linear residential built form along Crabgate Drive and Sherwood Drive, and Crabgate Lane in the south east. Whilst the existing Green Belt boundary is therefore not a linear Belt Boundary represent boundary, the existing boundary is formed by strongly defined features. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by the A1(M) in the west and Green Lane in the North. The Proposed Green Belt boundary features are therefore considered to be strong and the Resultant Green Belt ‘recognisable and likely boundary would result in a natural rounding off of Skellow. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Strong

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 46 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the north of Carcroft and Skellow, which was identified as a ‘Small Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options and the third built-up areas. tier ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016) Carcroft and Skellow is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site exists within a land gap between Skellow and Burghwallis. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting At its closest point, the distance between the Proposed Green Belt Site and Burghwallis is approximately 655m and direct access between these settlements is achieved along Grange Lane. Overall, neighbouring development that would result in views are reduced from the Proposed Green Belt Site due to dense woodland associated with Burghwallis Grange and the gently rising topography. Despite this direct access, there is a good towns from merging, coalescence or significant perception of separation between the settlements created by distance and levels of vegetation to the extent where development is unlikely to cause merging between settlements. The Proposed Green merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Belt site therefore exists within and maintains a less essential gap between settlements. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 1 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed There are no instances of ribbon development extending beyond the Skellow or Carcroft boundary towards another inset Green Belt settlement. However, as there is an area of built form to the east Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon of Grange Lane which extends far to the north, it is considered that release of the Proposed Green Belt Site would not contribute additionally to opportunities for ribbon development. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area is considered to display an open, arable countryside character in the north-west with a relatively mixed and enclosed character in the assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and south and south east surrounding the built form of Carcroft and Skellow. Given the Green Belt in this location is open, arable countryside, the area has a limited tolerance to change, and a very safeguarding features important to the limited tolerance to change further in the north west, however, enclosed areas around the existing settlements but away from the existing settlements where development would have a localised the appreciation of the countryside to impact on views or landform countryside change. The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the majority of the land within North 4 as category C3 Carcroft to Norton Limestone Plateau. This category is described as a gently from rolling landform dipping gently to the north, south and east with arable farming in an irregular patchwork of fields and some pasture around settlements. There are many fragmented or lost field encroachment. boundary hedges but where they remain they often contain mature trees. There are farmsteads scattered throughout the area with a network of minor lanes and tracks with some public rights of way. The A1(M) is generally well screened. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains agricultural land and contains components which are considered to be easily replaced or substituted. Despite proximity to the A1(M), land at this location is in a fair condition, and generally, the Green Belt would have a limited tolerance to change. Given the limited levels of enclosure, development within the Green Belt could have a negative impact on the physical landform and an impact on views across the area. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form, which would mean that the Site displays a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. However, as a result of the A1(M) in the west which is an features within the Proposed Green ‘urbanising feature’, the Green Belt at this location is considered to be more reflective of a ‘Strong Rural Character’. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as it is not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Study preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as it is not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Study Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Given the relative strength of the existing Green Belt Boundary, the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be connected to the Regeneration Priority Area of Carcroft/Skellow. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 3 recycling of derelict and other urban land’.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 47 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The General Area of North 4 has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the General Area is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, the Green Belt does have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to generally support largely essential land gaps between settlements and is considered to be of moderate-high sensitivity to development. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by the A1(M) in the west and Green Lane in the North. The Proposed Green Belt boundary features are therefore considered to be strong and the Resultant Green Belt boundary would result in a natural rounding off of Skellow. The Proposed Green Belt site would perform in a largely similar manner to the wider General Area. The Proposed Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, and the Site is considered to have only a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a less essential gap between Skellow and Burghwallis, and the Site is considered to have a moderate-strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 48 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

17 Carcroft and Skellow 185: Land at Mill Lane and Crabgate, Skellow

Proposed Green Belt 185 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land off Crabgate Lane, Skellow Site Size 14.8 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the north of Skellow and Carcroft. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing North 4 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within the large North 4 General Area. This General Area exists to the north of Carcroft and Skellow and therefore, the Green Belt is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is Area Assessment not in close proximity to any large built-up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • North 4 supports a number of land gaps between Carcroft and Burghwallis; Carcroft and Owston; Askern, Norton and Campsall; and Askern and Sutton. On the whole, Green Belt within North 4 supports largely essential gaps between settlements, which means some development could take place away from access tracks with limited risk of merging (Purpose 2a, Score 3). There are also a number of instances of built form which extends along an access track but there are no instances of ribbon development extending beyond the Skellow or Carcroft boundary towards another inset Green Belt settlement. On balance, the existing Green Belt boundary has resisted ribbon development in part (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The character of the landscape is open, arable countryside and has a limited tolerance to change. Therefore the Green Belt at this location is considered to have moderate-high sensitivity to development (Purpose 3a, Score 4). North 4 contains the inset settlements of Norton, Campsall, Sutton, Owston and Burghwallis, and the General Area contains 2.05% built form. Although the character of the area is rural, the percentage of built form has a semi-urban character in part (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Askern, Carcroft, and Skellow do not have a historic town or a complex historic core. Campsall has a strong historic character but is not a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of the Purpose (Purpose 4a, Score 1). There are also no views towards the core of a ‘Historic Town’ (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • North 4 is connected to Askern, Carcroft and Skellow which are Regeneration Priority Areas and the existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be contiguous with these Regeneration Priority Areas (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by an angular area of residential built form, which acutely indents around the Wainscot Place and Acacia Road. The existing Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be Belt Boundary represent angular and unlikely to be permanent boundary. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by an agricultural field boundary in the north and east, and an area of residential built form off Mill Lane in the west. The Proposed Green Belt boundaries are therefore ‘recognisable and likely considered to be predominantly weak. Whilst the resultant Green Belt boundary would round-off the angularity of the existing Green Belt boundary, the outcome would not be any stronger than what already exists. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 49 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the north of Carcroft and Skellow, which was identified as a ‘Small Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options version July built-up areas. 2015 and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Carcroft and Skellow is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site exists within a land gap between Skellow and Burghwallis. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting At its closest point, the distance between the Proposed Green Belt Site and Burghwallis is approximately 850m however there is no direct access from the site to Burghwallis. Whilst there are views neighbouring development that would result in between settlements, there is a good perception of separation between the settlements created by distance. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore maintains a less essential gap between settlements. towns from merging, coalescence or significant Score: 1 merging into erosion, both physical or visually of one another. a valued gap between neighbouring settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed There are no access tracks within the Proposed Site and therefore, there are no opportunities for ribbon development to occur. Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Score: 0 development which would otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area is considered to display an open, arable countryside character in the north-west with a relatively mixed and enclosed character in the assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and south and south east surrounding the built form of Carcroft and Skellow. Given the Green Belt in this location is open, arable countryside, the area has a limited tolerance to change, and a very safeguarding features important to the limited tolerance to change further in the north west, however, enclosed areas around the existing settlements but away from the existing settlements where development would have a localised the appreciation of the countryside to impact on views or landform countryside change. The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the majority of the land within North 4 as category C3 Carcroft to Norton Limestone Plateau. This category is described as a gently from rolling landform dipping gently to the north, south and east with arable farming in an irregular patchwork of fields and some pasture around settlements. There are many fragmented or lost field encroachment. boundary hedges but where they remain they often contain mature trees. There are farmsteads scattered throughout the area with a network of minor lanes and tracks with some public rights of way. The A1(M) is generally well screened. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains agricultural land and generally contains components which are considered to be easily replaced or substituted. Land at this location is in a fair condition, and generally, the Green Belt would have a limited tolerance to change. The Proposed Green Belt Site displays very limited levels of enclosure and strong views to Burghwallis which is raised, and therefore, development within this Site could be in conflict with the landform, scale and patterns of the landscape and be visually intrusive. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to contain land which is of moderate-strong sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form, which would mean that the Site displays a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. features within the Proposed Green Score: 5 Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as it is not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Study preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as it is not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Study Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Given the indented and partially contained nature of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be contiguous with the Regeneration Priority Area of Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Carcroft/Skellow. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 4

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 50 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The General Area of North 4 has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the General Area is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, the Green Belt does have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to generally support largely essential land gaps between settlements and is considered to be of moderate-high sensitivity to development. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by an agricultural field boundary in the north and east, and an area of residential built form off Mill Lane in the west. The Proposed Green Belt boundaries are therefore considered to be predominantly weak. Whilst the resultant Green Belt boundary would round-off the angularity of the existing Green Belt boundary, the outcome would not be any stronger than what already exists. The Proposed Green Belt site would perform in a largely similar manner to the wider General Area. The Proposed Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, and the Site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a less essential gap between Skellow and Burghwallis. However, the land within the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment, owing to the site containing features which are of moderately-strong sensitivity to encroachment and no existing encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 51 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

18 Carcroft and Skellow 186: Land off Crabgate Lane, Skellow

Proposed Green Belt 186 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land off Crabgate Lane, Skellow Site Size 6.9 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the north of Skellow and Carcroft. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing North 4 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within the large North 4 General Area. This General Area exists to the north of Carcroft and Skellow and therefore, the Green Belt is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is Area Assessment not in close proximity to any large built-up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • North 4 supports a number of land gaps between Carcroft and Burghwallis; Carcroft and Owston; Askern, Norton and Campsall; and Askern and Sutton. On the whole, Green Belt within North 4 supports largely essential gaps between settlements, which means some development could take place away from access tracks with limited risk of merging (Purpose 2a, Score 3). There are also a number of instances of built form which extends along an access track but there are no instances of ribbon development extending beyond the Skellow or Carcroft boundary towards another inset Green Belt settlement. On balance, the existing Green Belt boundary has resisted ribbon development in part (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The character of the landscape is open, arable countryside and has a limited tolerance to change. Therefore the Green Belt at this location is considered to have moderate-high sensitivity to development (Purpose 3a, Score 4). North 4 contains the inset settlements of Norton, Campsall, Sutton, Owston and Burghwallis, and the General Area contains 2.05% built form. Although the character of the area is rural, the percentage of built form has a semi-urban character in part (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Askern, Carcroft, and Skellow do not have a historic town or a complex historic core. Campsall has a strong historic character but is not a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of the Purpose (Purpose 4a, Score 1). There are also no views towards the core of a ‘Historic Town’ (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • North 4 is connected to Askern, Carcroft and Skellow which are Regeneration Priority Areas and the existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be contiguous with these Regeneration Priority Areas (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by linear residential built form along Crabgate Drive and Sherwood Drive, and Crabgate Lane in the south east. Whilst the existing Green Belt boundary is therefore not a linear Belt Boundary represent boundary, the existing boundary is formed by strongly defined features. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by an agricultural field boundary in the north, which is considered to be a weakly-defined and not likely to be permanent feature. Boundaries to the east and west would be ‘recognisable and likely strongly defined by the A1(M) and Crabgate Lane. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would therefore be mixed in strength, however the Resultant Green Belt boundary would create a natural rounding off to the built form of to be permanent’ Carcroft and Skellow. Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 52 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the north of Carcroft and Skellow, which was identified as a ‘Small Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options and the third built-up areas. tier ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Carcroft and Skellow is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site exists within a land gap between Skellow and Burghwallis. prevent Green Belt Site in resisting At its closest point, the distance between the Proposed Green Belt Site and Burghwallis is approximately 775m and direct access between these settlements is achieved along Grange Lane. Overall, neighbouring development that would result in views are reduced from the Proposed Green Belt Site due to dense woodland associated with Burghwallis Grange and the gently rising topography. Despite this direct access, there is a good towns from merging, coalescence or significant perception of separation between the settlements created by distance and levels of vegetation to the extent where development is unlikely to cause merging between settlements. The Proposed Green merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Belt site therefore maintains a less essential gap between settlements. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 1 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed There are no instances of ribbon development extending beyond the Skellow or Carcroft boundary towards another inset Green Belt settlement. However, as there is an area of built form to the east Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon of Grange Lane which extends far to the north, it is considered that release of the Proposed Green Belt Site would not contribute additionally to opportunities for ribbon development. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area is considered to display an open, arable countryside character in the north-west with a relatively mixed and enclosed character in the assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and south and south east surrounding the built form of Carcroft and Skellow. Given the Green Belt in this location is open, arable countryside, the area has a limited tolerance to change, and a very safeguarding features important to the limited tolerance to change further in the north west, however, enclosed areas around the existing settlements but away from the existing settlements where development would have a localised the appreciation of the countryside to impact on views or landform countryside change. The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the majority of the land within North 4 as category C3 Carcroft to Norton Limestone Plateau. This category is described as a gently from rolling landform dipping gently to the north, south and east with arable farming in an irregular patchwork of fields and some pasture around settlements. There are many fragmented or lost field encroachment. boundary hedges but where they remain they often contain mature trees. There are farmsteads scattered throughout the area with a network of minor lanes and tracks with some public rights of way. The A1(M) is generally well screened. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains agricultural land and few components which would be considered to be easily replaced or substituted. Despite proximity to the A1(M), land at this location is in a fair condition, and generally, the Green Belt would have a limited tolerance to change. Given the limited levels of enclosure, development within the Green Belt could have a negative impact on the physical landform and an impact on views across the area. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form, which would mean that the Site displays a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. However, as a result of the A1(M) in the west which is an features within the Proposed Green urbanising feature, the Green Belt at this location is considered to be more reflective of a ‘Strong Rural Character’. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as it is not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Study preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as it is not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Study Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be connected to the Regeneration Priority Area of Carcroft/Skellow. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 3 recycling of derelict and other urban land’.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 53 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The General Area of North 4 has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the General Area is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, the Green Belt does have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to generally support largely essential land gaps between settlements and is considered to be of moderate-high sensitivity to development. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by an agricultural field boundary in the north, which is considered to be a weakly-defined and not likely to be permanent feature. Boundaries to the east and west would be strongly defined by the A1(M) and Crabgate Lane. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would therefore be mixed in strength, however the Resultant Green Belt boundary would create a natural rounding off to the built form of Carcroft and Skellow. The Proposed Green Belt site would perform in a largely similar manner to the wider General Area. The Proposed Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, and the Site is considered to have only a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a less essential gap between Skellow and Burghwallis.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 54 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

19 Carcroft and Skellow 273: Askern Road, Carcroft

Proposed Green Belt 273 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Askern Road, Carcroft Site Size 9.1 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the east of Carcroft and Skellow. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing North 4 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within the large North 4 General Area. This General Area exists to the north of Carcroft and Skellow and therefore, the Green Belt is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is Area Assessment not in close proximity to any large built-up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • North 4 supports a number of land gaps between Carcroft and Burghwallis; Carcroft and Owston; Askern, Norton and Campsall; and Askern and Sutton. On the whole, Green Belt within North 4 supports largely essential gaps between settlements, which means some development could take place away from access tracks with limited risk of merging (Purpose 2a, Score 3). There are also a number of instances of built form which extends along an access track but there are no instances of ribbon development extending beyond the Skellow or Carcroft boundary towards another inset Green Belt settlement. On balance, the existing Green Belt boundary has resisted ribbon development in part (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The character of the landscape is open, arable countryside and has a limited tolerance to change. Therefore the Green Belt at this location is considered to have moderate-high sensitivity to development (Purpose 3a, Score 4). North 4 contains the inset settlements of Norton, Campsall, Sutton, Owston and Burghwallis, and the General Area contains 2.05% built form. Although the character of the area is rural, the percentage of built form has a semi-urban character in part (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Askern, Carcroft, and Skellow do not have a historic town or a complex historic core. Campsall has a strong historic character but is not a ‘historic town’ in the local interpretation of the Purpose (Purpose 4a, Score 1). There are also no views towards the core of a ‘Historic Town’ (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • North 4 is connected to Askern, Carcroft and Skellow which are Regeneration Priority Areas and the existing Green Belt boundary is considered to be contiguous with these Regeneration Priority Areas (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by a field boundary, a shallow field drain and the extent of allotment gardens. The existing Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be weakly defined, not recognisable and Belt Boundary represent unlikely to be permanent. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by field boundary, an indented area defined by a shallow field drain and a further field boundary. Proposed Green Belt boundaries are therefore considered to be weak. ‘recognisable and likely Whilst the resultant Green Belt boundary would round-off the angularity of the existing Green Belt boundary, the resultant boundary would be of equal strength to what already exists. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 55 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt Site boundary exists to the east of Carcroft and Skellow, which was identified as a ‘Small Urban Area’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options version July built-up areas. 2015 and the third tier ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). Carcroft and Skellow is therefore not considered to form part of the ‘Large Built up Area’ of Doncaster. The Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site provides some support to a land gap between Carcroft and Skellow and Owston, which is identified as a ‘Defined Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). neighbouring development that would result in The General Area was considered to preserve a largely essential gap between Carcroft and Skellow, as a result of the connection along Owston Lane. However, given the proposed Green Belt site towns from merging, coalescence or significant exists to the south east of the built form of Carcroft and Skellow, and does not extend beyond the existing residential built form further north, the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to maintain a merging into erosion, both physical or visually of less essential land gap at this location where development could be possible without the risk of merging between settlements. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 1 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed Whilst there are no access tracks within the Proposed Site, the B1220 Skellow Road exists to the south of the Site. Given built form extends further to the east along the southern side of Skellow Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Road, development at this location would not additionally contribute to ribbon development which could reduce the perceived separation between settlements. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area is considered to display an open, arable countryside character in the north-west with a relatively mixed and enclosed character in the assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and south and south east surrounding the built form of Carcroft and Skellow. Given the Green Belt in this location is open, arable countryside, the area has a limited tolerance to change, and a very safeguarding features important to the limited tolerance to change further in the north west, however, enclosed areas around the existing settlements but away from the existing settlements where development would have a localised the appreciation of the countryside to impact on views or landform countryside change. The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Proposed Green Belt Site as falling within (F2) Owston to Sykehouse Settled Clay Farmlands. Category F2 is described as a low from lying landform with small scale arable and pasture fields including hay meadows. The land here has dense boundary hedges with frequent mature hedgerow trees. There is a network of green lanes encroachment. and public rights of way running through the area, with compact historic settlements and many scattered farmsteads. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains agricultural land and few components which would be considered to be easily replaced or substituted. Land at this location is in a fair condition, and generally, the Green Belt would have a limited tolerance to change. The Proposed Green Belt Site displays relatively high levels of enclosure within the built form and therefore development is likely to have a local impact on the physical landform, the scale of the landscape or view across the area. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to contain land which is of moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form, which would mean that the Site displays a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. However, given the high levels of enclosure, the Proposed features within the Proposed Green Green Belt Site is not considered to represent an ‘unspoilt’ area of Green Belt. Therefore, the Proposed Site is considered to be more representative of a ‘Strong Rural Character’. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as it is not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Study preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 1 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Neither Carcroft nor Skellow are considered to represent a ‘historic town’; as it is not considered to have a ‘complex historic core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Character Study Proposed Green Belt Site has a role or the Core Strategy. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt site is not considered to have a role in preserving the setting and special character of a historic town. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Given the indented and partially contained nature of the existing Green Belt boundary, the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be contiguous with the Regeneration Priority Area of Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Carcroft/Skellow. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 4

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 56 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The General Area of North 4 has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the General Area is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, nor preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, the Green Belt does have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to generally support largely essential land gaps between settlements and is considered to be of moderate-high sensitivity to development. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be defined by field boundary, an indented area defined by a shallow field drain and a further field boundary. Proposed Green Belt boundaries are therefore considered to be weak. Whilst the resultant Green Belt boundary would round-off the angularity of the existing Green Belt boundary, the resultant boundary would be of equal strength to what already exists. The Proposed Green Belt site would perform in a largely similar manner to the wider General Area. The Proposed Site is not considered to be checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area, or preserving the setting and special character of a historic town, and the Site is considered to have a moderately strong role in assisting in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a less essential gap between Carcroft and Owston. However, the area within the Proposed Site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment: the area contains land which is of moderate sensitivity to encroachment, and whilst the area contains no built form, high levels of containment reduce the perception of the area being ‘unspoilt’.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 57 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

20 Conisbrough 040: Land at Sheffield Road/Old Road, Hilltop, Conisbrough

Proposed Green Belt 040 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land at Sheffield Road/Old Road, Hilltop, Conisbrough Site Size 8.9 Hectares Location of Site and The site is adjacent to the Main Town of Conisbrough and Denaby, in the far west of Doncaster. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Conisbrough 6 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • Whilst the General Area is approximately 3.6km from the built extent of Urban Rotherham, Conisbrough 6 is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built Up Area as it is not in close Area Assessment proximity to a large built up area. Therefore the existing Green Belt designation is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt but is not in close proximity to any large built-up area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • Conisbrough 6 has a role in supporting a less essential gap between Conisbrough and 'Green Belt Settlements' of Hooton Roberts and Hooton Pagnall. It supports a wide, but largely essential strategic gap between Conisbrough and Thrybergh which forms part of Rotherham Urban Area (Purpose 2a, Score 3). The existing Green Belt boundary within Conisbrough has strongly resisted ribbon development (Purpose 2b, Score 5). • Given the Green Belt land at this location has a semi-rural, urban fringe character, the area is considered to be relatively tolerant of change. Development in this location would have a local impact on the physical landform and would have an impact on the extensive open views to the north and south. The General Area is considered to be moderately sensitive to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 3). The General Area contains 2.93% built form which is identified as semi-urban character and contains the part of the settlement, Hill Top; therefore this General Area is considered to be representative of a moderately strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • Conisbrough is considered to be a historic town, but Conisbrough 6 is considered to be separated from the historic core of Doncaster by a dense tree belt and post WWII development (Purpose 4a, Score 2). In addition, due to pre and post-war development that separates the General Area from the historic core, there are no key views of the historic core (Purpose 4b, Score 1). • Conisbrough 6 is connected to and in close proximity to the Conisbrough Regeneration Priority Area, and therefore, is considered to be directing development towards brownfield and derelict land within development limits (Purpose 5, Score 3). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by residential properties along Maple Grove and Micklebring Grove. Belt Boundary represent The Proposed Green Belt Site is defined almost exactly by the parameters of Conisbrough 6 General Area, however the settlement of Hill Top is excluded from the Proposed Site. If the Proposed Green Belt site was removed a ‘boundary which is from the Green Belt, the resultant Green Belt boundary would be defined in the south of the site by the A630/Sheffield Road and to the west by Old Road, which is also the extent of the Doncaster Metropolitan Borough ‘recognisable and likely boundary. The resultant Green Belt boundary would be strong as this road is a recognisable, durable and likely to be permanent boundary feature. to be permanent’ Resultant Boundary Strength: Strong

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 58 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The proposed Green Belt site is connected to the south west of Conisbrough, which is identified as a ‘Main Town’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March built-up areas. 2016) and not part of the ‘large built up area’ of the Main Urban Area of Doncaster. Conisbrough 6 is also approximately 3.6km from the edge of Urban Rotherham, however this is not considered to be in close proximity. Therefore the Proposed Green Belt Site is connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to any large built-up area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed Hill Top, which exists approximately 750m to the west of the General Area is a settlement within the Doncaster Green Belt. However, as this settlement is ‘washed over’ by the Green Belt within prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Doncaster, the Proposed Green Belt Site is not considered to have a role in preventing these ‘neighbouring towns from merging’. Whilst releasing the Proposed Green Belt Site would result in neighbouring development that would result in coalescence between Doncaster and Hill Top, the Green Belt here was never considered to have a role in preventing these neighbouring towns from merging. towns from merging, coalescence or significant Releasing the Proposed Green Belt site would have only a limited impact on the separation between Conisbrough and Hooton Roberts and Hooton Pagnall. This land gap would remain a less merging into erosion, both physical or visually of essential gap as a result of the land rising to a higher topography between these settlements. In addition, releasing the Proposed Green Belt site would ensure that the wide, but largely essential gap one another. a valued gap between neighbouring between Conisbrough and Urban Rotherham is retained as there would still be limited views between settlements and the scale of proposed development is relatively modest. settlements within the District. Overall, the Proposed Green Belt site therefore has a mixed contribution towards preventing neighbouring towns from merging into one another. Score: 1 (Mixed, 0, 1 and 3) Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The existing Green Belt boundary had strong resisted ribbon development. The Proposed Green Belt Site boundaries could continue to resist ribbon development, however, ribbon development at this Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon location would only reduce the perception of separation between Conisbrough and Hill Top. development which would Score: 5 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area contains one large agricultural field. The topography of the General Area declines from the east to west. Vegetation is dominated by a single assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and arable agricultural field; there are two trees within the area and gappy hedgerows around the perimeter. There is no public access through the General Area. Whilst views to the east are limited, there safeguarding features important to the are expansive views to the horizon in all other directions. the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies Conisbrough 6 as category A1 Conisbrough to Denaby Coalfield Farmlands. The landscape character of A1 is identified as having a countryside change. complex, undulating topography which is cut by many small streams. The landform within the General Area rises up to an escarpment to the limestone plateau immediately to the east. The General from Area is characterised by arable farmland with some pasture including horse grazing in an irregular patchwork of medium scale fields with thick mixed hedgerows with mature trees on field encroachment. boundaries. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: Given that the Green Belt land at this location has a semi-rural, urban fringe character, the area is considered to be relatively tolerant of change. There are a small collection of buildings, some of which are historic, surrounding the ‘washed over’ village of Hill Top. Whilst the older Hilltop Hotel is considered to be a locally-distinctive component with limited replacability or substitutability, the General Area contains few natural distinctive components. Agricultural land at this location is in a fair condition. Development in this location would have an impact on the physical landform of the site and would have an impact on the extensive, open views to the north and south. On balance, the General Area contains Green Belt that is moderately sensitive to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains no built form. However, as a result of the Hill Top Village to the west of the Proposed Site, the Site is not considered to have an ‘unspoilt’ character and is features within the Proposed Green instead considered to be more characteristic of a ‘Strong Rural Character’. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Based on analysis of the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) and the assessment of views within the Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal, it is considered that preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role the Proposed Green Belt site would continue to be separated from the historic core of Doncaster by a dense tree belt and post WWII residential development. setting and in supporting the character of the Score: 2 special Historic Town or Place within the character of Borough. historic towns. Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Based on the Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal Views and the level of pre and post-war development that separates the General Area from the Historic Core, there are no key views of the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role historic core. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt The Proposed Green Belt Site, and the Conisbrough 6 General Area, is connected to and in close proximity with Conisbrough Regeneration Priority Area and therefore by its designation, is Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the considered to be directing development towards brownfield and derelict land within the development limits. recycling of derelict and other urban land’ Score: 3

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 59 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Summary The Strategic Green Belt General Area of Conisbrough 6 and the Proposed Green Belt Site are almost identical. Although receiving a higher score for resisting ribbon development, the Strategic Green Belt General Area received Moderate or Lower score for the remainder of the Purposes. Whilst Conisbrough 6 would have a role in supporting a less essential gap between Conisbrough and 'Green Belt Settlements' of Hooton Roberts and Hooton Pagnall it supports a wide, but largely essential strategic gap between Conisbrough and Thrybergh which forms part of Rotherham Urban Area. The General Area received lower scores for its contribution to the preserving the setting of the historic town of Conisbrough, the General Area was considered to have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. The proposed Resultant Green Belt boundary is considered to be predominantly strong, defined by the Old Road in the north and Sheffield Road in the south. Although the Proposed Green Belt site and the existing Green Belt boundary does have a strong role in preventing ribbon development, the Proposed Green Belt site is not connected to a large built up area, would have a limited impact on the historic core of Conisbrough and would have a moderate role in directing development towards brownfield and derelict land. Whilst release of the Proposed Green Belt site would still maintain the wide, strategic, but largely essential gap between Conisbrough and the Urban Area of Rotherham and less essential gap between the smaller outlying settlements of Hooton Pagnall and Hooton Roberts, release of this Green Belt land would result in coalescence with the ‘washed over’ Hamlet of Hill Top. Green Belt land at this location has a moderately strong sensitivity to encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 60 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

21 Conisbrough 142: Land south of Sheffield Road, Conisbrough

Proposed Green Belt 142 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Land South of Sheffield Road, Conisbrough Site Size 4.4 Hectares Location of Site and The site is located to the south of the Main Town Conisbrough and Denaby, in the far west of Doncaster. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Conisbrough 5 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • As Warmsworth (which exists to the far west of Conisbrough 5) forms part of the Main Urban area of Doncaster, the Green Belt in the north east is considered to be contiguous with the 'large urban area of Doncaster'. Area Assessment Therefore, the existing Green Belt designation has a role in preventing sprawl which would only otherwise be prevented by features lacking in durability (Purpose 1, Score 4). • Conisbrough 5 supports a series of land gaps within and neighbouring the General Area. These include land gaps between Conisbrough and Maltby; Conisbrough and New Edlington/ the south of Warmsworth; New Edlington and Maltby; New Edlington and Balby; and New Edlington and Wadworth. Based on the number of land gaps and their role, the General Area was considered to have a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The existing Green Belt boundary within Conisbrough has had an overall mixed role in preventing ribbon development, but along the A630 there are no incidences of built form, which supports strongly resisted ribbon development (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The Proposed Green Belt Site forms part of the Green Belt to the south of Conisbrough which slopes towards the rural land to the south; development would thus have an impact on views, landform and pattern of the landscape. The wider General Area is considered to be moderately sensitive to encroachment. Due to the topography, extensive views and countryside character, development in this General Area would have a negative impact on the physical landform. There are areas of built form surrounding the existing settlements where development would not be in conflict. As such, the wider area contains Green Belt land that is moderately-high sensitive to development (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The General Area contains 1.12% built form which is identified as being a moderately strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • Given the scale of Conisbrough 5, and the fact that Conisbrough is considered to be a historic town, the General Area attains a mixed score for the extent to which it has a role in supporting the character of the Historic Town or Place within the Borough (Purpose 4a, Score 3). In addition, as a result of the undulating nature of the General Area, there are generally limited views to historic cores within the Green Belt (Purpose 4b, Score 2). • Conisbrough 5 is associated with two Regeneration Priority Areas as identified by the Doncaster Core Strategy (2012). In the north, the boundary is connected to Conisbrough. In the east, the boundary is contiguous with New Edlington. (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location includes the strongly-defined A630/Sheffield Road to the north, which is durable and readily recognisable boundary feature. Belt Boundary represent Following release of the Proposed Green Belt site, the resultant Green Belt boundary would be defined by the following features: in the south by the private road of Spring Bank Road; in the south west by a field boundary with a ‘boundary which is somewhat weakly defined and gappy hedgerow; in the north west by Park Lane, and in the east by extent of the Conisbrough Cemetery. The resultant Green Belt boundaries are weak, and particularly weak in the south and south west. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore be created by a weakly indented area of built form which extends to the south of Sheffield Road.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 61 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large Whilst the wider General Area is considered to be contiguous with the ‘Main Town’ of Conisbrough within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016), the Green built-up areas. Belt at this location is considered to be ‘connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt but not in close proximity to any large built-up area’. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site is a small site supporting land gaps between Conisbrough and the ‘inset’ village of Clifton and Micklebring, which were both identified as a ‘Small Village’ within the prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Issues and Options Draft (2015), and ‘defined villages’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). The Proposed Green Belt site falls within the following neighbouring development that would result in land gaps: towns from merging, coalescence or significant • Conisbrough and Clifton: The Proposed Green Belt site falls within a land gap which is approximately 1.65km from Clifton and contains isolated scattered farmsteads, the dismantled railway merging into erosion, both physical or visually of line and the area known as Conisbrough Parks. A strongly undulating topography, disused railway line lined with a tree corridor which passes between the settlements which supports the one another. a valued gap between neighbouring perception of separation. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore falls within a Largely Essential land gap, however due to the scale of the Site and dense vegetation boundary, this is considered settlements within the District. to be a Less Essential Gap. • Conisbrough and Micklebring: Given the settlement of Micklebring exists almost directly to the south of Clifton beyond the M18, the assessment of this land gap is largely the same. However the presence of the M18 adds an additional boundary to the separation between these settlements and therefore the Green Belt at this location is considered to maintain a Less Essential Gap between settlements. Score: 1 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The A630 exists to the north and Park Lane also exists to the west of the Site which connects Conisbrough to settlements further west. Given built form exists to the north of the A630, development Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon of the Proposed Green Belt Site would not perceptibly contribute to ribbon development. The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore would not contribute to ribbon development. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area contains land which is predominantly rural, open, countryside character. The area directly to the south of Conisbrough contains the assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and Crookhill Park Golf Course and a number of small wooded areas. Elsewhere within this northern section is a medium patchwork of arable fields and pastures which are divided by low hedgerows and safeguarding features important to the occasional trees. The topography slopes upwards towards Conisbrough, restricting views into the settlement from this area. There are views of undulating land and occasional trees. the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Proposed Green Belt Site as falling within A1 Conisbrough and Denaby Coalfield Farmlands is described as a complex undulating countryside change. topography cut by many small streams. There is arable farmland with some pasture including horse grazing in an irregular patchwork of medium scale fields and thick mixed hedgerows with mature from trees on field boundaries. There are trees along streams and a dismantled railway and occasional small blocks of woodland in the area. encroachment. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains an agricultural field and an access track associated with the cemetery to the east. The Proposed Green Belt Site therefore contains features which are predominantly easily replaced and not considered to be rare or distinctive. Land at this location is gently undulating with a broad ridge passing through the Proposed Green Belt Site with the land in the north falling towards Conisbrough and in the south towards the Conisbrough Parks area. Development would therefore be particularly prominent in the southern portion of the Proposed Green Belt Site, where it would have an adverse effect on a higher quality landscape and where it would be in conflict with views, the landform and scale of the area. The southern part of the Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to have a very limited tolerance to change, whereas nearing the built form, development would have less of an impact on views or key features of the landscape. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to have a high sensitivity to encroachment in the south and moderately-high in the north. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 2.6% built form which is connected to the newly developed track to the east which is associated with the Cemetery. This level of built form would categorise features within the Proposed Green the Site as having a ‘Semi-urban character’. Belt Site have been impacted by However, given a ‘Cemetery’ is identified as an appropriate land use in the Green Belt (Paragraph 89 of the NPPF), the Green Belt at this location is considered to be more reflective of a Moderately ‘Encroachment’. Strong Rural Character. Score: 3 Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Conisbrough is considered to have a ‘Complex Historic Core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation. The Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal (2015) states that: preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Conisbrough conservation area is dominated by the castle and the church, both of which are Grade I listed buildings, with the castle also being a Scheduled Ancient Monument. The castle is located setting and in supporting the character of the on a hill-top within the town, which is centred around the church on a spur behind. The town dates from at least the Anglo-Saxon period, and its main street pattern and the church origins are from special Historic Town or Place within the this period. There are a large amount of trees and green spaces especially around the castle and the north-eastern parts of the conservation area. The Conservation Area has several 17th and 18th character of Borough. century properties, but there are also numerous buildings from the Victorian period, mainly in the form of commercial and residential terraces. Buildings tend to be mainly of a simple form and use a historic towns. limited range of materials; brick, render or stone for walls, with natural Welsh slate or clay pantiles for the roof. Stone boundary walls are a significant feature. Within the conservation area there are eight listed buildings. In addition, the South Yorkshire Historic Landscape Characterisation states that ‘character areas within this Complex Historic Core zone include those historic settlements identifiable on the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) that display a more complex urban form than settlements within the ‘Nucleated Rural Settlements’ zone.’ Based on analysis of the

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 62 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) and the assessment of the Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal, it is considered that the Green Belt within the Proposed Green Belt Site was originally adjacent to Providence Place and built form at Clifton View. The Proposed Green Belt site is therefore separated from the Historic Core of Conisbrough by Sheffield Road and vegetation surrounding Providence Place. Further assessment work would need to be undertaken to determine the heritage impact should this site be considered for development. Score: 4 Purpose 4b: Extent to which the Whilst there are views to the built form along Clifton View, there are limited views to the Conservation Area or the Historic Core despite the high point in topography identified at the centre of the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Proposed Site. Views towards the historic core of Conisbrough are therefore considered to be enclosed by vegetation along the Sheffield Road, however there are moderate scale detractors in the in supporting the views into and out form of modern built form. of the historic core. Score: 2 Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Conisbrough is considered to be a Regeneration Priority Area within the Core Strategy; the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be connected to this Regeneration Priority Areas. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 3 recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Summary The Strategic Green Belt General Area received a mixed score when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Five Purposes of the Green Belt, achieving Moderate or Moderately High Scores across most Purposes owing to the General Areas proximity to the Doncaster Main Urban Area, role in preserving the separation between a number of neighbouring settlements, moderately strong rural character and proximity to the historic core of Conisbrough and regeneration priority areas. Following release of the Proposed Green Belt site, the resultant Green Belt boundary would be defined by the following features: in the south by the private road of Spring Bank Road; in the south west by a field boundary with somewhat weakly defined and gappy hedgerow; in the north west by Park Lane, and in the east by extent of the Conisbrough Cemetery. The resultant Green Belt boundaries are weak, and particularly weak in the south and south west. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would therefore be created by a weakly indented area of built form which extends to the south of Sheffield Road. The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt Site does not have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas and a weak role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging, the Green Belt at this location does have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. Most prominently, the Proposed Green Belt Site is only considered to be separated from the Historic Core of Conisbrough (that defined by Providence Place and Clifton View) by only a natural boundary (woodland to the rear of the Providence Place). The Site is considered to have a moderate role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. The Green Belt at this site also contains features which are considered to be moderate-high sensitivity to development.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 63 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

22 Conisbrough 221: Garage off Sheffield Road/ Clifton Hill, Conisbrough (Site B)

Proposed Green Belt 221 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Garage off Sheffield Road/ Clifton Hill, Conisbrough (Site B) Site Size 1.9 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the south of Conisbrough. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Conisbrough 5 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • As Warmsworth forms part of the Main Urban area of Doncaster, the Green Belt in the north east is considered to be contiguous with the 'large urban area of Doncaster'. Therefore, the existing Green Belt designation has a Area Assessment role in preventing sprawl which would only otherwise be prevented by features lacking in durability (Purpose 1, Score 4). • Conisbrough 5 supports a series of land gaps within and neighbouring the General Area. These include land gaps between Conisbrough and Maltby; Conisbrough and New Edlington/ the south of Warmsworth; New Edlington and Maltby; New Edlington and Balby; and New Edlington and Wadworth. Based on the number of land gaps and their role, the General Area was considered to have a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The existing Green Belt boundary within Conisbrough has had a mixed role in preventing ribbon development (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • Due to the topography, extensive views and countryside character, development in this area would have a negative impact on the physical landform. There are areas of built form surrounding the existing settlements where development would not be in conflict. As such, the area contains Green Belt land that is of moderately-high sensitivity to development. (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The General Area contains 1.12% built form which is identified as being a moderately strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • Given the scale of Conisbrough 5, and the fact that Conisbrough is considered to be a historic town, the general area attains a mixed score for the extent to which it has a role in supporting the character of the Historic Town or Place within the Borough (Purpose 4a, Score 3). In addition, as a result of the undulating nature of the General Area, there are generally limited views to historic cores within the Green Belt (Purpose 4b, Score 2). • Conisbrough 5 is associated with two Regeneration Priority Areas as identified by the Doncaster Core Strategy (2012). In the north, the boundary is connected to Conisbrough. In the east, the boundary is contiguous with New Edlington. (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is defined by the Sheffield Road A630 in the north and north west, and the indented extent of the built form associated with the Garage to the north and the Public House to the Belt Boundary represent south. Whilst the A630 is considered to be a strongly defined, recognisable and likely to be permanent feature, the boundaries created by the built form are considered to be relatively weak. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be created by a densely wooded corridor of trees to the south and south east. To the north east, the Green Belt boundary is weakly defined by no physical infrastructure or natural ‘recognisable and likely boundary, and instead is likely to be the extent of an area of landownership. The Proposed Green Belt boundary is therefore created by features which are mixed in strength: strong to the south and south east and weak to the to be permanent’ north. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would be created by an angular area of built form which extends to the south of Conisbrough. Nonetheless, this could bring boundary coherence to the existing built form which is inset within the Green Belt to the south of Sheffield Road.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 64 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt site adjoins the southern side of the settlement of Conisbrough, which is identified as a ‘Main Town’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements built-up areas. (March 2016). Therefore, Conisbrough does not form part of the ‘Main Urban Area of Doncaster’, and the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to the large built up area of Doncaster. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site is a small site supporting land gaps between Conisbrough and the ‘inset’ village of Clifton and Old Edlington, which were both identified as a ‘Small Village’ within the prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Issues and Options Draft (July 2015), and ‘defined villages’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). The Proposed Green Belt site falls within the neighbouring development that would result in following land gaps: towns from merging, coalescence or significant • Conisbrough and Clifton: The Proposed Green Belt site falls within a land gap which is approximately 1.8km from Clifton and contains isolated scattered farmsteads and the Crookhill Park merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Golf Course. Clifton is raised above the wider area, with the topography falling away towards the north. There is a disused railway line with a tree corridor which passes between the settlements one another. a valued gap between neighbouring which supports the perception of separation. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore falls within a Largely Essential land gap, however due to the scale of the Site and dense vegetation settlements within the District. boundary, this is considered to be a Less Essential Gap. • Conisbrough and Old Edlington: The land gap between Conisbrough and Old Edlington is approximately 2km from the Proposed Green Belt Site, and contains a large number of arable fields. There is no direct access between settlements. The topography is gently rising towards Old Edlington, but there are no views from the Proposed Green Belt Site due to the thick vegetation surrounding the site. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore falls within and maintains a Largely Essential land gap, however due to the scale of the Site and dense vegetation boundary, this could be considered to be a Less Essential Gap. Score: 1 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt site exists to the south of Sheffield Road A630. Although there are instances of built form to the west of the site which existed on the 6 inch to the mile OS map (1888- Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon 1913), development at this location would contribute to existing ribbon development to the south of Conisbrough. Given there is built form to the south of the A630 in both easterly and westerly development which would directions, development at this location would not contribute further to ribbon development. otherwise have resulted in the Score: 0 reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The General Area contains land which is predominantly rural, open, countryside character. The area directly to the south of Conisbrough contains the assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and Crookhill Park Golf Course and a number of small wooded areas. Elsewhere within this northern section is a medium patchwork of arable fields and pastures which are divided by low hedgerows and safeguarding features important to the occasional trees. The topography slopes upwards towards Conisbrough, restricting views into the settlement from this area. There are views of undulating land and occasional trees. the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Proposed Green Belt Site as falling within A1 Conisbrough and Denaby Coalfield Farmlands is described as a complex undulating countryside change. topography cut by many small streams. There is arable farmland with some pasture including horse grazing in an irregular patchwork of medium scale fields and thick mixed hedgerows with mature from trees on field boundaries. Scattered red brick farmsteads. There are trees along streams and a dismantled railway and occasional small blocks of woodland in the area. encroachment. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains a large area of hardstanding in the south east, and a dense copse of trees to the south west and north of the Site. The Green Belt at this location is considered to display a mixed sensitivity to encroachment: • The area to the south and west of the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features that are rare and distinctive, such as the dense area of woodland which adjoins the Ashfield Brick Pits SSSI. These features are no easily replaced or substituted and therefore the Green Belt has a relatively limited tolerance to change. Development at this location would have an adverse effect upon vulnerable features of the countryside. Further assessment work would be necessary to determine the impact of site release on these features. • The area to the north east and east contains a large area of hard-standing, surrounded by some large trees. The Green Belt at this location is therefore considered to be tolerant of change and land at this location is considered to be in a poor and unkempt condition. Given the high levels of enclosure created by the dense woodland, development at this location could have a local impact on views, landform and sale of the site. The Proposed Green Belt Site has a mixed sensitivity to encroachment: High in the south and south west and low in the north east. The Site is therefore considered to display a moderately-high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 40% built form which is connected to the area of hard-standing in the east. This level of built form means that the Site displays a Moderately-Urban Character. features within the Proposed Green However as a result of the dense tree boundary, the Green Belt at this location is considered to be more reflective of a Semi-Urban Character. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 2 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Conisbrough is considered to have a ‘Complex Historic Core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation. The Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal (2015) states that: preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Conisbrough conservation area is dominated by the castle and the church, both of which are Grade I listed buildings, with the castle also being a scheduled ancient monument. The castle is located on setting and in supporting the character of the a hill-top within the town, which is centred around the church on a spur behind. The town dates from at least the Anglo-Saxon period, and its main street pattern and the church origins are from this special period. There are a large amount of trees and green spaces especially around the castle and the north-eastern parts of the conservation area. The Conservation Area has several 17th and 18th century

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 65 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

character of Historic Town or Place within the properties, but there are also numerous buildings from the Victorian period, mainly in the form of commercial and residential terraces. Buildings tend to be mainly of a simple form and use a limited historic towns. Borough. range of materials; brick, render or stone for walls, with natural Welsh slate or clay pantiles for the roof. Stone boundary walls are a significant feature. Within the conservation area there are eight listed buildings. In addition, the South Yorkshire Historic Landscape Characterisation states that ‘character areas within this Complex Historic Core zone include those historic settlements identifiable on the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) that display a more complex urban form than settlements within the ‘Nucleated Rural Settlements’ zone. Based on analysis of the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) and the assessment of the Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal, it is considered that the Green Belt within the Proposed Green Belt Site was originally adjacent to a Works and the Proposed Site is adjacent to the Conservation Area boundary which exists beyond Sheffield Road. The Proposed Green Belt site is therefore separated from the Historic Core of Conisbrough by Sheffield Road, by vegetation along the edge of the site and Clifton Hill Road and the existing Garage. Further site-specific work would be necessary to determine the impact of releasing any Green Belt land at this location on the Historic Core of Conisbrough. Score: 4 Purpose 4b: Extent to which the The Conservation Area Appraisal identifies one of the key views into the Conservation Area is along Clifton Hill road which exists to the east of the site. Views to the Castle and the Historic Core of Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Conisbrough are strong with limited low-lying detractors. in supporting the views into and out Further site-specific work would be necessary to determine the impact of releasing any Green Belt land at this location on the Historic Core of Conisbrough. of the historic core. Score: 4 Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Conisbrough is considered to be a Regeneration Priority Area within the Core Strategy; the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be connected to this Regeneration Priority Areas. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 3 recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Summary The Strategic Green Belt General Area received a mixed score when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Five Purposes of the Green Belt, achieving Moderate or Moderately High Scores across most Purposes owing to the General Areas proximity to the Doncaster Main Urban Area, role in preserving the separation between a number of neighbouring settlements, moderately strong rural character and proximity to the historic core of Conisbrough and regeneration priority areas. The Proposed Green Belt boundary is therefore created by features which are mixed in strength: strong to the south and south east and weak to the north. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would be created by an angular area of built form which extends to the south of Conisbrough. Nonetheless, this could bring boundary consolidation to the existing built form which is inset within the Green Belt to the south of Sheffield Road. The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt Site does not have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas and a weak role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging, the Green Belt at this location does have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. Most prominently, the Proposed Green Belt Site is only considered to be separated from the Historic Core of Conisbrough by Sheffield Road and existing built from, and therefore the Site is considered to have a relatively strong role in preserving the setting of the Historic Town of Conisbrough. The Proposed Green Belt Site has a mixed sensitivity to encroachment: high in the south and south west and low in the north east, whereby overall, the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to have a moderately-strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 66 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

23 Conisbrough 825: Fields off Drake Head Lane, Conisbrough

Proposed Green Belt 825 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Field off Drake Head Lane, Conisbrough Site Size 5.4 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the east of Conisbrough. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Conisbrough 5 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • As Warmsworth forms part of the Main Urban area of Doncaster, the General Area in the north east is considered to be contiguous with the 'large urban area of Doncaster'. Therefore, the existing Green Belt designation Area Assessment has a role in preventing sprawl which would only otherwise be prevented by features lacking in durability (Purpose 1, Score 4). • Conisbrough 5 supports a series of land gaps within and neighbouring the General Area. These include land gaps between Conisbrough and Maltby; Conisbrough and New Edlington/ the south of Warmsworth; New Edlington and Maltby; New Edlington and Balby; and New Edlington and Wadworth. Based on the number of land gaps and their role, the General Area was considered to have a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The existing Green Belt boundary within Conisbrough 5 has had a mixed role in preventing ribbon development (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • Due to the topography, extensive views and countryside character, development in this area would have a negative impact on the physical landform. There are areas of built form surrounding the existing settlements, and therefore in these locations, development is unlikely to be in conflict. As such, the area contains Green Belt land that is of moderately-high sensitivity to development. (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The General Area contains 1.12% built form which is identified as being a moderately strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • Given the scale of Conisbrough 5, and the fact that Conisbrough is considered to be a historic town, the general area attains a mixed score for the extent to which it has a role in supporting the character of the Historic Town within the Borough (Purpose 4a, Score 3). In addition, as a result of the undulating nature of the General Area, there are generally limited views to historic cores within the Green Belt (Purpose 4b, Score 2). • Conisbrough 5 is associated with two Regeneration Priority Areas as identified by the Doncaster Core Strategy (2012). In the north, the boundary is connected to Conisbrough. In the east, the boundary is contiguous with New Edlington. (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is formed by the weakly defined Drake Head Lane in the north and the built form to the rear of Rye Croft and Templestowe Gate in the south and south west. The existing Belt Boundary represent Green Belt boundary is therefore considered to be mixed in strength: weakly defined by the Drake Head Lane private track in the north and moderately defined by the angular residential built form in the south. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be created by weakly defined field boundaries in the north, north west, east and south east. Proposed Green Belt boundaries are therefore considered to be relatively weak. Given the ‘recognisable and likely nature of the Proposed Green Belt site, the Resultant Green Belt boundary at this location would create an isolated area of Green Belt to the rear of Drake Head Lane in the north west, which would perforate the designation. to be permanent’ The Resultant Green Belt boundary is therefore also considered to be weak. Resultant Boundary Strength: Weak

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 67 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt site adjoins the southern side of the settlement of Conisbrough, which is identified as a ‘Main Town’ within the Homes and Settlements Strategy Consultation Draft. built-up areas. Therefore, Conisbrough does not form part of the ‘Main Urban Area of Doncaster’, and the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to the large built up area of Doncaster. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site support land gaps between Conisbrough and New Edlington which was identified as Third Tier ‘Service Town and Village’ within the Doncaster Local Plan prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). This land gap between these settlements is 630m at its narrowest point. However, the topography raises to a high point between settlements at the neighbouring development that would result in end of Drake Head Lane, and therefore there are limited views between these settlements. There is a strong perception of separation at this location. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt Site falls towns from merging, coalescence or significant within and maintains a Largely Essential Gap between two or more settlements where the overall openness and scale of the gap is important to restricting merging or protecting gaps involving other merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Green Belt Settlements, but where limited development may be possible. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Score: 3 settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed There are no access tracks within the Proposed Site and therefore there are no opportunities for ribbon development to occur. Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Score: 3 development which would otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The area between Conisbrough and New Edlington consists of a patchwork of medium-size arable fields which are divided by low, fragmented hedgerows and assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and occasional trees. To the east, adjacent to New Edlington is a body of water enclosed by a sparsely wooded area. A dismantled railway crosses the area at the approximate centre which is lined with a safeguarding features important to the partial tree corridor. The area raises to a high point between settlements, and therefore views between Conisbrough and New Edlington are restricted. the appreciation of the countryside to The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the Proposed Green Belt Site as falling within the C1 Stainton to Edlington Limestone Plateau Character Area which is described as countryside change. a gently rolling landform dipping gently to the north and east, with large intensive arable farmland with some pasture around settlements. There are occasional streams along dips in the landform and from some ancient woodlands with many small blocks of trees and wooded strips along roads and watercourses. Mature roadside hedges restrict views but elsewhere there is an open feel with extensive encroachment. views to the east and west. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt site comprises two agricultural fields which are bounded by low, gappy hedgerows in the east and west. Green Belt land at this location is considered to be in a fair and maintained condition and contains components which are considered to be easily replaced or substituted. The topography ascends away from Conisbrough and the site is somewhat contained by existing built form to the north and west, therefore, development at this location would have an impact on the physical landform and views across the area. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to contain features which are moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Further investigative work of the impact on the New Edlington Brickpit SSSI should be carried out, should development take place in this area. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form and therefore contains land which display a ‘strong unspoilt rural character’. features within the Proposed Green Score: 5 Belt Site have been impacted by ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Conisbrough is considered to have a ‘Complex Historic Core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation. The Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal (2015) states that: preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Conisbrough conservation area is dominated by the castle and the church, both of which are Grade I listed buildings, with the castle also being a Scheduled Ancient Monument. The castle is located setting and in supporting the character of the on a hill-top within the town, which is centred around the church on a spur behind. The town dates from at least the Anglo-Saxon period, and its main street pattern and the church origins are from special Historic Town or Place within the this period. There are a large amount of trees and green spaces especially around the castle and the north-eastern parts of the conservation area. The Conservation Area has several 17th and 18th character of Borough. century properties, but there are also numerous buildings from the Victorian period, mainly in the form of commercial and residential terraces. Buildings tend to be mainly of a simple form and use a historic towns. limited range of materials; brick, render or stone for walls, with natural Welsh slate or clay pantiles for the roof. Stone boundary walls are a significant feature. Within the conservation area there are eight listed buildings. In addition, the South Yorkshire Historic Landscape Characterisation states that ‘character areas within this Complex Historic Core zone include those historic settlements identifiable on the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) that display a more complex urban form than settlements within the ‘Nucleated Rural Settlements’ zone.’ Based on analysis of the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) and the assessment of the Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal, it is considered that the Green Belt within the Proposed Green Belt Site is separated from the Historic Core of Conisbrough by post-WWII development. Score: 2 Purpose 4b: Extent to which the The Conservation Area Appraisal identifies that there are no key views to the Historic Core from this area of Conisbrough. Whilst some views of the historic core may be possible from the north of Proposed Green Belt Site has a role the proposed site, these are likely to channelled and constrained, and be impacted by moderate-large scale detractors such as extensive post-WWII development.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 68 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

in supporting the views into and out Score: 2 of the historic core. Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Conisbrough is considered to be a Regeneration Priority Area within the Core Strategy; the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be connected to this Regeneration Priority Areas. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 3 recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Summary The Strategic Green Belt General Area received a mixed score when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Five Purposes of the Green Belt, achieving Moderate or Moderately High Scores across most Purposes owing to the General Areas proximity to the Doncaster Main Urban Area, role in preserving the separation between a number of neighbouring settlements, moderately strong rural character and proximity to the historic core of Conisbrough and regeneration priority areas. The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be created by weakly defined field boundaries in the north, north west, east and south east. Proposed Green Belt boundaries are therefore considered to be relatively weak. Given the nature of the Proposed Green Belt site, the Resultant Green Belt boundary at this location would create an isolated area of Green Belt to the read of Drake Head Lane in the north west, which would perforate the designation. The Resultant Green Belt boundary is therefore also considered to be weak. The Proposed Green Belt Site has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt Site does not have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas, the Green Belt at this location does have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be separated from the Historic Core by post-WWII development, views to the historic core are likely to be constrained and channelled. Owing to no built form within the area and the relative isolation from the extent of existing built form of Conisbrough, the Proposed Green Belt is considered to have a moderate – strong role in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 69 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

24 Conisbrough 826: Field off Clifton Hill, Conisbrough

Proposed Green Belt 826 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Field off Clifton Hill, Conisbrough Site Size 2.8 Hectares Location of Site and The site lies to the south of Conisbrough. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Conisbrough 5 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • As Warmsworth forms part of the Main Urban area of Doncaster, the General Area in the north east is considered to be contiguous with the 'large urban area of Doncaster'. Therefore, the existing Green Belt designation Area Assessment has a role in preventing sprawl which would only otherwise be prevented by features lacking in durability (Purpose 1, Score 4). • Conisbrough 5 supports a series of land gaps within and neighbouring the General Area. These include land gaps between Conisbrough and Maltby; Conisbrough and New Edlington/ the south of Warmsworth; New Edlington and Maltby; New Edlington and Balby; and New Edlington and Wadworth. Based on the number of land gaps and their role, the General Area overall was considered to have a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging (Purpose 2a, Score 4). The existing Green Belt boundary within Conisbrough has had a mixed role in preventing ribbon development (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • Due to the topography, extensive views and countryside character, development in this area would have a negative impact on the physical landform. There are areas of built form surrounding the existing settlements where development would not be in conflict. As such, the area contains Green Belt land that is of moderately-high sensitivity to development. (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The General Area contains 1.12% built form which is identified as being a moderately strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 3). • Given the scale of Conisbrough 5 and the fact that Conisbrough is considered to be a ‘Complex Historic Town Core’, the general area attains a mixed score for the extent to which it has a role in supporting the character of the Historic Town or Place within the Borough (Purpose 4a, Score 3). In addition, as a result of the undulating nature of the General Area, there are generally limited views to historic cores within the Green Belt (Purpose 4b, Score 2). • Conisbrough 5 is associated with two Regeneration Priority Areas as identified by the Doncaster Core Strategy (2012). In the north, the boundary is connected to Conisbrough. In the east, the boundary is contiguous with New Edlington. (Purpose 5, Score 4). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary at this location is defined by the rear of residential built form along Medley View in the north west and Snake Lane in the north east, which is supported by the rear of residential built form and Belt Boundary represent allotments off Corn Hill. a ‘boundary which is The Proposed Green Belt boundary would be created by the strongly defined Clifton Hill in the south west and former dismantled railway line, which is now supported by low-lying vegetation, an embankment feature and ‘recognisable and likely residential built form to the south. The Proposed Green Belt boundaries are therefore considered to be mixed, but predominantly strong. Should the Proposed Green Belt site be released, the Resultant Green Belt boundary to be permanent’ would be strongly defined by the Dismantled Railway supported by the existing extent of residential built form in the north. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would be linear, recognisable and likely to be permanent. Resultant Boundary Strength: Strong, although somewhat weaker in the south east

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 70 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large The Proposed Green Belt site adjoins the southern side of the settlement of Conisbrough, which is identified as a ‘Main Town’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements built-up areas. (March 2016). Therefore, Conisbrough does not form part of the ‘Main Urban Area of Doncaster’, and the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to be connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but not in close proximity to the large built up area of Doncaster. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt Site is a small site supporting land gaps between Conisbrough and the ‘inset’ village of Clifton and Old Edlington, which were both identified as a ‘Small Village’ within the prevent Green Belt Site in resisting Issues and Options Draft (2015), and ‘Defined Villages’ within the Homes and Settlements Strategy Consultation Draft (2016). Therefore there is a need to assess the extent to which there are neighbouring development that would result in opportunities for these settlements to merge with the built form of Conisbrough. The Proposed Green Belt site falls within the following land gaps: towns from merging, coalescence or significant • Conisbrough and Clifton: The Proposed Green Belt site falls within a land gap which is approximately 1.3km from Clifton and which contains isolated scattered farmsteads and the Crookhill merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Park Golf Course. Clifton is raised above the wider area, with the topography falling away towards the north. This undulating area of land limits the possibility for views between settlements. one another. a valued gap between neighbouring Therefore, whilst the wider Green Belt at this location does support a Largely Essential Gap between these settlements, because of the scale of the site and limited views, there is a strong settlements within the District. perception of separation and the Proposed Green Belt site is recalibrated to supporting a Less Essential Gap. • Conisbrough, New Edlington and Old Edlington: The land gap between Conisbrough and Old Edlington is approximately 1.6km from the Proposed Green Belt Site, and approximately 1.3km from New Edlington, The land gap contains a large number of agricultural fields, and however with the landform rising toward Conisbrough Common in the central and southern area, there are limited views between settlements. Whilst there is no direct access between settlements, Carr Lane and Edlington lane provide access to both settlements. The Proposed Green Belt site therefore falls within a Largely Essential land gap. Overall the Proposed Green Belt site is considered to fall within and maintain a largely essential gap. Score: 3 Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed There are two residential properties to the south of the Proposed Green Belt site, which were not present on the 6-inch to the mile OS map (1999 – 1947). Therefore the B6094 at this location has Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon resisted ribbon development in part. development which would Score: 3 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within two of the defined areas within the Stage 1 assessment of Conisbrough 5. assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and • A distinct area exists in the west of the General Area and surrounds the settlement of Clifton. The area consists of a patchwork of medium to large arable fields which are divided by low, safeguarding features important to the fragmented hedgerows, shrubbery and occasional trees, particularly lining lanes. Clifton is raised above the surrounding agricultural fields and topography slopes down towards a the appreciation of the countryside to valley-like feature in the north. There are views into Clifton as it is positioned on higher ground, there are also views of tree corridors and undulation in the horizon. countryside change. • from A distinct area exists directly to the south of Conisbrough contains the Crookhill Park Golf Course and a number of small wooded areas. Elsewhere within this northern section is a medium encroachment. patchwork of arable fields and pastures which are divided by low hedgerows and occasional trees. The topography slopes upwards towards Conisbrough, restricting views into the settlement from this area. There are views of undulation and occasional trees.

The Proposed Green Belt Site falls within the Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) C1 Stainton to Edlington Limestone Plateau area. This area is described as a gently rolling landform dipping gently to the north and east, with large intensive arable farmland with some pasture around settlements. There are occasional streams along dips in the landform and some ancient woodlands with many small blocks of trees and wooded strips along roads and watercourses. Mature roadside hedges restrict views but elsewhere there is an open feel with extensive views to the east and west. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt Site contains a single agricultural field which is contained by built form to the north, north west and south east and a dismantled railway embankment to the east. Although the Site is in relatively close proximity to the Ashfield Brick Pit, the Green Belt Site itself contains no features which are considered to be rare or distinctive. Whilst there are long-distance and open views to the south, development would only a limited impact on views from the south and east. The Proposed Site would therefore be contained within the existing boundary features, however this would still retain perceived separation between Conisbrough and the Farmstead along Denbrook Lane. Green Belt at his location is in a fair and maintained condition, and land is considered to be of limited tolerance to change. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of moderate-high sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 4 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these The Proposed Green Belt Site contains 0.0% built form, and is therefore considered to display a strong unspoilt rural character. However as a result of the perceived levels of containment, created by features within the Proposed Green the built form along Clifton Hill to the south, the Green Belt at this location is considered to be more representative of ‘Strong Rural Character’. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Conisbrough is considered to have a ‘Complex Historic Core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation. The Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal (2015) states that: preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Conisbrough conservation area is dominated by the castle and the church, both of which are Grade I listed buildings, with the castle also being identified as a Scheduled Ancient Monument. The setting and in supporting the character of the castle is located on a hill-top within the town, which is centred around the church on a spur behind. The town dates from at least the Anglo-Saxon period, and its main street pattern and the church special origins are from this period. There are a large amount of trees and green spaces especially around the castle and the north-eastern parts of the conservation area. The Conservation Area has several

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 71 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

character of Historic Town or Place within the 17th and 18th century properties, but there are also numerous buildings from the Victorian period, mainly in the form of commercial and residential terraces. Buildings tend to be mainly of a simple historic towns. Borough. form and use a limited range of materials; brick, render or stone for walls, with natural Welsh slate or clay pantiles for the roof. Stone boundary walls are a significant feature. Within the conservation area there are eight listed buildings. In addition, the South Yorkshire Historic Landscape Characterisation states that ‘character areas within this Complex Historic Core zone include those historic settlements identifiable on the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) that display a more complex urban form than settlements within the ‘Nucleated Rural Settlements’ zone.’ Based on analysis of the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) and the assessment of the Conisbrough Conservation Area Appraisal, it is considered that the Green Belt within the Proposed Green Belt Site is separated from the Historic Core of Conisbrough by post-WWII development. Further investigative work would be necessary to determine the impact of site release on the Historic Core. Score: 2 Purpose 4b: Extent to which the The Conservation Area Appraisal identifies one of the key views into the Conservation Area is along Clifton Hill road which exists to the west of the site. Whilst views to the Castle and the Historic Proposed Green Belt Site has a role Core of Conisbrough are spreading and open from this location, there are some medium scale detractors in the form of modern residential built form. in supporting the views into and out Further investigative work would be necessary to determine the impact of site release on the Historic Core. of the historic core. Score: 3 (Mixed, 3 and 4) Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Conisbrough is considered to be a Regeneration Priority Area within the Core Strategy; the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be connected to this Regeneration Priority Areas. Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Score: 3 recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Summary The Strategic Green Belt General Area received a mixed score when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Five Purposes of the Green Belt, achieving Moderate or Moderately High Scores across most Purposes owing to the General Areas proximity to the Doncaster Main Urban Area, role in preserving the separation between a number of neighbouring settlements, moderately strong rural character and proximity to the historic core of Conisbrough and regeneration priority areas. The Proposed Green Belt boundaries are considered to be mixed, but predominantly strong. Should the Proposed Green Belt site be released, the Resultant Green Belt boundary would be strongly defined by the Dismantled Railway supported by the existing extent of residential built form in the north. The Resultant Green Belt boundary would be linear, recognisable and likely to be permanent. The Proposed Green Belt site has a mixed role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of the Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt Site does not have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas and a weak role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging, the Green Belt at this location does have a moderate role in assisting in urban regeneration. Whilst the Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to be separated from the Historic Core by post-WWII development, there are views to the Historic Core which are only limited by medium-scale detractors. The Green Belt at this location is considered to have a moderate-strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 72 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

25 Denaby Main 251: Hill Top Road, Denaby Main

Proposed Green Belt 251 Boundary of Proposed Green Belt Site Site Reference Site Name Hill Top Road, Denaby Main Site Size 13.2 Hectares Location of Site and The proposed Green Belt site adjoins the southern edge of Denaby Main. relationships with inset settlement

General Area containing Mexborough 2 Site (from Stage 1 Assessment)

Summary of General • The proposed Green Belt site falls within Mexborough 2. Mexborough is a ‘Large Urban Area’ in the Doncaster Local Plan Issues and Options (July 2015) and a ‘Main Town’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Area Assessment Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). The settlement of Mexborough is therefore not considered to represent a ‘Large Built up Area’. Therefore, the Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built-up Area (Purpose 1, Score 1). • The General Area supports a number of land gaps including between Mexborough and Denaby; Denaby/Conisbrough and Mexborough and Swinton/Kilnhurt; Mexborough and Old Denaby; and Mexborough and Swinton/Kilnhurst. The General Area therefore has a mixed role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging (Purpose 2a, Score 3). Ferry Boat Lane, Denaby Lane, Doncaster Road (A6023) and Hill Top Lane (A630) extend from Mexborough and Denaby. The A630 and Denaby Lane have resisted ribbon development; Doncaster Road does not have a role in resisting ribbon development; and Ferry Boat Lane has had a role in ribbon development in part. Therefore the General Area has resisted ribbon development in part (Purpose 2b, Score 3). • The landscape of the area is predominantly arable fields, with some flood plains located in the west of the site. Due to the undulating topography and countryside character, development in this area would have a negative impact on the physical landform. As such the area contains Green Belt land that of moderately-high sensitivity to encroachment (Purpose 3a, Score 4). The General Area contains 2.82% built form and is considered to have a having a semi-urban character. The more open south east and south west are considered to be more characteristic of a moderately-strong rural character (Purpose 3b, Score 2). • Mexborough is considered to have a complex historic core, but the Green Belt is separated from this by the River Don, a natural boundary (Purpose 4a, Score 4). Due to the wooded character of the landscape, views towards the historic core of Mexborough are only possible from the centre-west of the Green Belt. Views to the historic core of the settlement from the Green Belt or out from the historic core are channelled and constrained (Purpose 4b, Score 2). • Mexborough 2 is associated with one Regeneration Priority Area. In the north, the boundary is connected to and in close proximity to Mexborough (Purpose 5, Score 3). Does the Resultant Green The existing Green Belt boundary is defined by industrial built form along Elland Road and the extent of Hill Top Road in the north. Belt Boundary represent The Proposed Green Belt site would be defined to the west by Denaby Wood, to the south by the Doncaster Green Belt boundary which is supported by a corridor of mature trees, and the Hill Top Road and a weakly defined a ‘boundary which is field boundary in the east. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to be strongly defined, recognisable and likely to be permanent in the west and south, and weaker in the east. ‘recognisable and likely Resultant Boundary Strength: Mixed in Strength to be permanent’

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 73 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Appraisal of Proposed Green Belt Site against the Local Interpretation of the Five NPPF Green Belt Purposes Purpose 1: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large Denaby Main with Conisbrough is considered to be a ‘Main Town’ within the Doncaster Local Plan Consultation: Homes and Settlements (March 2016). The settlement of Denaby Main and built-up areas. Conisbrough is therefore not considered to represent a ‘Large Built up Area. Therefore, the Green Belt at this location is therefore connected to the South Yorkshire Green Belt, but is not considered to have a role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a Large Built Up Area. Score: 1 Purpose 2: To Purpose 2a: Role of the Proposed The Proposed Green Belt site falls within a land gap between Denaby and Hooton Roberts, which exists 1.7km to the south of the Site. However, this is a Green Belt Settlement within Rotherham prevent Green Belt Site in resisting which is washed over by the Green Belt. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt Site would have no discernible contribution to separation between Denaby and Hooton Roberts. neighbouring development that would result in Given the built form of Denaby extends further to the west than the Proposed Green Belt site, the Site would make no discernable contribution to separation between Denaby and the Defined Village towns from merging, coalescence or significant of Old Denaby. merging into erosion, both physical or visually of Score: 1 one another. a valued gap between neighbouring settlements within the District. Purpose 2b: Role of the Proposed Whilst the Hill Top Road exists to the north east of the Proposed Site, which connects Denaby to Conisbrough in the east, the built form of Denaby Main extends further eastwards than the Proposed Green Belt Site in resisting ribbon Green Belt Site. Therefore, the Proposed Green Belt Site would not represent ribbon development along an access track that would reduce the perception of separation between settlements. development which would Score: 0 otherwise have resulted in the reduction of perceived separation between settlements. Purpose 3: To Purpose 3a: Sensitivity of the General Area Assessment Summary: The wider General Area is predominantly characterised by arable fields, although the western area is characteristics of flood plain associated within the River assist in Proposed Green Belt Site and Don. The topography within the area is undulating in the east, with a steep escarpment down to the river floodplains in the west. The General Area is dominated by arable fields, although there are safeguarding features important to the some low and gappy hedgerows, copse of woodland associated with the River Don and areas of dense woodland surrounding Denaby Wood in the north east. The area to the north east is therefore the appreciation of the countryside to distinctly more enclosed, whereas the character of the west of the General Area is slightly more open. Access is limited. countryside change. The Ecus Landscape Character Capacity Study (2006) identifies the land as falling within A1 Conisbrough and Denaby Coalfield Farmlands. The A1 area is described as a complex undulating from topography cut by many small streams. Landform rises up as an escarpment to the limestone plateau immediately to the east. There is arable farmland, with red-brick farmsteads and with some encroachment. pasture including horse grazing in an irregular patchwork of medium scale fields. There are dense mixed hedgerows with mature trees on field boundaries. Trees generally exist along streams and a dismantled railway and occasional small blocks of woodland in the area. Proposed Green Belt Site Assessment: The Proposed Green Belt site comprises a single agricultural field, which is bordered by a strongly defined wooded corridor in the south west, areas of industry in the west and areas of woodland in the north. Aside from the wooded corridor to the south of the site, the Proposed Green Belt Site therefore contains features which are considered to be easily replaced (such as the agricultural field) and relatively few features within the Site which are considered to be rare or distinctive. Given the high levels of screening provided by the wooded corridor and sloping topography, which declines towards Denaby in the north, development would have a limited effect on views or the physical landform. Green Belt at this location is considered to be in a fair condition, however there does appear to be areas of hardstanding that exist on the north western edge of the site. Overall, the Green Belt land is considered to have a limited tolerance to change. The Proposed Green Belt Site is considered to contain features which are of a moderate sensitivity to encroachment. Score: 3 Purpose 3b: Extent to which these There is no built form within the General Area which should mean that the General Area displays a ‘Strong Unspoilt Rural Character’. However, as result of the enclosed topography and the features within the Proposed Green urbanising effect of the industrial sheds to the south west, the Green Belt at this location is considered to be more representative of a ‘Strong Rural Character’. Belt Site have been impacted by Score: 4 ‘Encroachment’. Purpose 4: To Purpose 4a: Extent to which the Mexborough is considered to have a ‘Complex Historic Core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation. Mexborough is considered a complex historic core due to the preserve the Proposed Green Belt Site has a role presence of a market place, castle and complex multi-phase planned layouts, all of which constitute evidence for deliberate acts of medieval planning. Conisbrough is also considered to have a setting and in supporting the character of the ‘Complex Historic Core’ within the South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation. Old Denaby is considered to be a ‘nucleated rural village’. special Historic Town or Place within the Analysis of the 1st edition 6 inch to the mile OS mapping of Doncaster (1851-1854) indicates that the Proposed Green Belt Site is separated from the Historic Core of these places by significant areas character of Borough. of pre-and post-WWI development to the north, and Denaby Forest and Old Denaby to the north west. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to be separated from the Historic Core by historic towns. pre- and post-WWII development. Score: 3 Purpose 4b: Extent to which the The Proposed Green Belt Site displays high levels of containment based on the wooded corridor to the south, the declining topography and built form to the north. The Proposed Green Belt Site is Proposed Green Belt Site has a role therefore considered to have very limited views of any key historic features. in supporting the views into and out Score: 1 of the historic core.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 74 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX

Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council Doncaster Green Belt Review Stage 3 Proposed Green Belt Sites for Assessment

Purpose 5: Extent to which the Proposed Green Belt Denaby is considered to be a Regeneration Priority Area within the Core Strategy. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to be contiguous with the Regeneration Priority Area of Site ‘assists in urban regeneration by encouraging the Denaby. recycling of derelict and other urban land’. Score: 4 Summary The existing General Area is considered to have a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and a moderate role in preventing neighbouring towns from merging. In addition, the Green Belt at this location is considered to contain land that is of moderately-high sensitivity and a moderate role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment. To the north of the General Area, the Historic Core of Mexborough is only separated from the Green Belt by the natural boundary of the River Don and the General Area has a relatively-strong role in preserving the setting and special character of a Historic Town. The General Area has a moderate role in encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The Proposed Green Belt site would be defined to the west by Denaby Wood, to the south by the Doncaster Green Belt boundary which is supported by a corridor of mature trees, and the Hill Top Road and a weakly defined field boundary in the east. The Proposed Green Belt Site is therefore considered to be strongly defined, recognisable and likely to be permanent in the west and south, and weaker in the east. The Proposed Green Belt Site has a moderate role when assessed against the Local Interpretation of Green Belt Purposes. Whilst the Proposed Site only has a weak role in checking the unrestricted sprawl of a large built up area and makes no discernable contribution to preventing neighbouring towns from merging, the Green Belt at this location does have a moderately-strong role in assisting in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment and a moderately-weak role in preserving the setting of a Historic Town. Green Belt land at this location does have a relatively strong role in encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land in Denaby.

| Issue | 11 May 2017 Page 75 J:\240000\245498-00\0 ARUP\0-09 PLANNING\0-09-08 REPORTS\10. STAGE 3 GREEN BELT APPRAISL 2017\7. FINAL ISSUE FOLDER\STAGE 3 GREEN BELT SITES RE-APPRAISAL_SITE PROFORMAS_DONCASTER MBC_ISSUE_110517.DOCX