Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy Advisory Committee 2 November 2009

This information is available free of charge in electronic, audio, Braille and large print versions, on request.

For assistance in understanding or reading this document or specific information about this Agenda please call Christine Laver on 01629 761300 or e-mail [email protected]

23 October 2009

To: All Councillors

As a Member of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Core Strategy Joint Advisory Committee, please treat this as your summons to attend the meeting on Monday 2 November 2009 at 6.30 pm at the Agricultural Business Centre, Bakewell.

Yours sincerely

Sandra Lamb Head of Democratic Services AGENDA

1. APOLOGIES Please advise Christine Laver on 01629 761300 or e-mail [email protected] of any apologies for absence.

2. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE PREVIOUS MEETING 27 July 2009

3. INTERESTS

To enable members to declare any personal and/or prejudicial interests they have in subsequent Agenda items. Interests that become apparent at a later stage in the proceedings may be declared at that time. Page Nos.

4. JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY 1 - 3 PROPOSED REVISIONS TO TIMETABLE

To consider progress on the preparation of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy and proposed revisions to the timetable for the preparation of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy.

Issued on 23 October 2009

5. JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY 4 - 6 GROWTH OPTIONS CONSULTATION FEEDBACK To update Members on the Growth Options consultation responses.

6. JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY 7 - 64 PROPOSED CORE STRATEGY STRUCTURE AND POLICIES To consider the proposed structure of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy, the suggested development strategy and the proposed policy content and direction.

Members of the Committee: Councillors Mrs Tracy Critchlow, Albert Catt, Steve Flitter, Mike Ratcliffe, Lewis Rose OBE, Geoff Stevens (Derbyshire Dales District Council members), Councillors Linda Baldry, Caitlin Bisknell, Peter Kay, David Lomax, Chris Pearson and Jean Wharmby (High Peak Borough Council Members)

Issued on 23 October 2009 NOT CONFIDENTIAL – For public release Item No. 4

DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK JOINT CORE STRATEGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2 NOVEMBER 2009

Report of Head of Planning Services and Head of Planning and Development Services

JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY PROPOSED REVISIONS TO TIMETABLE

SUMMARY

This report sets out progress on the preparation of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy proposes revisions to the timetable for the preparation of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy.

RECOMMENDATION

That the revised timetable set out in Paragraph 1.7 be recommended to Council (Derbyshire Dales) and the Executive (High Peak) for approval

WARDS AFFECTED

All Wards outside the Peak District National Park.

STRATEGIC LINK

The Joint Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Core Strategy will be a pivotal tool in the delivery of the both Council’s Corporate Plans and Sustainable Communities Strategy.

1 REPORT

1.1 The timetable for the preparation of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy is set out in both the Derbyshire Dales Local Development Scheme and the High Peak Local Development Scheme. The Secretary of State approved the Derbyshire Dales Local Development Scheme in February 2009 and is currently considering the High Peak Local Development Scheme.

1.2 The key milestones for the preparation of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy as set out in the relevant Local Development Schemes are:-

Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy Key Milestones 1 Commencement of Preparation Process 2nd October 2006 2 Public Participation in the Preparation of a DPD (Issues & Options) 26th March 2009 3 Publication of DPD (Draft Plan) 21st January 2010 4 Submission to the Secretary of State 29th July 2010 5 Pre-Examination Meeting 23rd September 2010 6 Examination 2nd November 2010 7 Receipt of Inspector’s Report 17th February 2011 8 Adoption 26th May 2011

1 1.3 Key Milestone 2 – Issues and Options, was achieved and the responses to that consultation exercise were reported to the last meeting of this Committee held on 27th July 2009. The Growth Options consultation which ended on 1st October 2009, was not originally included with the approved timetable but felt appropriate to undertake on the basis of the responses received to the Issues and Options consultation and as a result of lessons learned from further advanced Core Strategies.

1.4 As is reported elsewhere on the agenda for this meeting, there was a very significant level of interest in the Growth Options across both Local Planning Authority areas. Many of the responses to the consultation were concerned that infrastructure was not in place to accommodate new development or that, at this time, there were no planned improvements to infrastructure and other associated services and facilities required to support new development.

1.5 Whilst the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) did not indicate any insurmountable issues in relation to the capacity of existing infrastructure (including utilities) to accommodate new development, it is considered appropriate to continue the dialogue with the relevant utility companies and stakeholders and ensure that the development proposals to be included within the Draft Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy are capable of being delivered within the plan period.

1.6 As indicated at the last meeting of this Committee held on 27th July 2009, the Infrastructure Delivery Plan is a required element of the Core Strategy and will give a broad indication of what infrastructure is required within a defined area, where, when and how it will be funded during the plan period. At this time, however, evidence is continuing to be collected to ensure there are no gaps in the Infrastructure Delivery Plan. Given the extent of concerns raised during the Growth Options consultation in respect of this matter, it is considered prudent to ensure that the Draft Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy also includes a Draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan.

1.7 To enable these activities to be completed to a sufficiently detailed level for inclusion within the Draft Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy, it is considered necessary that additional time be made available within the overall timetable. A review of the timetable for the preparation of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy has been undertaken and it is considered that the following revised timetable will enable this work to be completed.

Activity Date End Date JAC Meeting 2nd November 2009 DDDC Council 26th November 2009 HPBC Exec 1st December 2009 JAC Meeting 7th December 2009 DDDC Council 21 st January 2010 HPBC Exec 9th February 2010 JAC Meeting 25th January 2010 HPBC Exec 25th February 2010 DDDC Council 25th February 2010 Draft Core Strategy Document Final Preparations 26th February 2010 23rd March 2010 Publication of Draft Core Strategy for Consultation 25th March 2010 20th May 2010 JAC Meeting 7th June 2010 HPBC Exec 23rd June 2010 DDDC Council 24th June 2010

2 Submission Core Strategy Final Preparations 25th June 2010 26th July 2010 Submission of Joint Core Strategy 29th July 2010

1.8 Assuming that the work set out above is completed efficiently it is considered that the Core Strategy could be submitted to the Secretary of State in July 2010 as originally scheduled in the Local Development Schemes, with adoption in May 2011.

2 RISK ASSESSMENT

2.1 Legal

Both Authorities have a legal obligation to prepare a Core Strategy and other elements of the Local Development Framework under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.2 Financial

The costs of preparing the Joint Core Strategy are included in each Authorities’ respective budgets.

2.3 Corporate Risk

The Joint Core Strategy will be a pivotal tool in the delivery of the both Council’s Corporate Plans and the Sustainable Communities Strategy. In order to fulfil this role it is necessary to ensure that robust evidence-based and “sound” documents are prepared. Failure to do so will undermine the ability of both Councils to achieve its key aims and objectives.

3 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

In preparing this report the relevance of the following factors has also been considered: prevention of crime and disorder, equality of opportunity, environmental, health, legal and human rights, financial, personnel and property considerations.

4 CONTACT INFORMATION

Mike Hase, Planning Policy Manager Tel No. 01629 761251 [email protected]

Hilary Senior, Principal Planning Officer Tel No. 0845 129777 Ext 3651 [email protected]

5 BACKGROUND PAPERS

Description Date File PPS 12: Local Development Frameworks June 2008 G/5/P2 Town and Country Planning (Local 27th June 2008 G/5/P2 Development) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008

Report And Minutes To Derbyshire Dales and 27th July 2009 G/5/P2 High Peak Joint Core Strategy Advisory Committee

3 NOT CONFIDENTIAL – For public release Item No. 5

DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK JOINT CORE STRATEGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2 NOVEMBER 2009

Report of Head of Planning Services and Head of Planning and Development Services

JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY GROWTH OPTIONS CONSULTATION FEEDBACK

SUMMARY

This report updates Members on the Growth Options consultation responses

RECOMMENDATION

That the report be noted and a detailed analysis of the consultation responses be presented to the next meeting of this Committee.

WARDS AFFECTED

All Wards outside the Peak District National Park.

STRATEGIC LINK

The Joint Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Core Strategy will be a pivotal tool in the delivery of the both Council’s Corporate Plans and Sustainable Communities Strategy.

REPORT

1.1 The Growth Options Consultation built on the Issues and Options consultation, where the comments received during that consultation suggested that the development strategy should focus new development on the Market Towns and the larger villages. The Growth Options Consultation sought to combine the comments received at the Issues and Options stage with the sites and areas suggested in the SHLAA, and bring the potential locations for growth into the public domain for comment.

1.2 The Growth Options Consultation took place between 27th August and 1st October 2009 with 1,300 organisations and individuals notified by email or letter. As part of the consultation 6,000 summary leaflets were produced and distributed widely. Copies were available in Council Offices and in local libraries.

1.3 Three workshops were organised for Parish Councils across the Plan area to assist them in making informed and timely responses to the consultation. The High Peak meeting was held on 9th September and the Derbyshire Dales meetings held on 9th and 10th September. These workshops were well attended by representatives from Parish Councils across both local planning authority areas.

4 1.4 Although exhibition material was displayed at all local libraries in the area on an unmanned basis, manned exhibitions were held in Glossop, Chapel en le Frith and Buxton. Exhibitions at Hulland Ward, Brailsford and Doveridge were followed by public meetings, at which over 200 people attended. A briefing for High Peak Councillors was held on 16 September 2009.

1.5 Press coverage included publication of articles in the Glossop Chronicle, Buxton Advertiser, Matlock Mercury and Ashbourne News Telegraph. Radio interviews were broadcast on High Peak Radio and Radio Derby. Articles also appeared on the BBC website and in the Manchester Evening News. The consultation exercise also generated a number of “letters to Editors” appearing in the Ashbourne News Telegraph and Buxton Advertiser.

1.6 Some of these responses raised concerns about the amount of advance notification given for the consultation exercise and the potential for disenfranchisement that this may have resulted in.

1.7 At the time of writing this report, over 1,250 comments have been input into the Online Consultation Portal with approximately 300 responses still outstanding. The consultation exercise has generated a high degree of public interest amongst the communities of the two areas which will be of considerable benefit to the formulation of Policy

1.8 The vast majority of comments have been received from individuals who have not previously been involved in any consultations. A large number of comments concerned about the draft proposals were received from residents living in Hulland Ward, Brailsford, Doveridge and Whaley Bridge.

1.9 There was, as expected, a significant amount of interest in this consultation exercise. Not only did the consultation exercise result in concerns about the location (and scale) of some of the potential growth options but comments were also made about the overall development strategy.

1.10 There were a number of comments made which suggested that, in terms of achieving sustainable development and maximising opportunities for development on previously developed land, the development strategy should focus solely upon the Market Towns.

1.11 Other comments received suggested that rather than concentrating development in a few settlements, there should be a more even distribution across all settlements, including those smaller ones with more limited services and facilities.

1.12 Many of the responses to the consultation were concerned that infrastructure was not in place to accommodate new development or that, at this time, there were no planned improvements to infrastructure and other associated services and facilities required to support new development. Many respondents recognised the need for more homes but the level of the requirement was a concern.

1.13 Given that there is currently further work to be completed in respect of the inputting of consultation responses onto the Online Consultation Portal, it is not possible to provide a detailed analysis of the responses received. A verbal update on the level and content of responses will be presented to the meeting.

5 1.14 It is, however, considered that in order to take the development strategy forward it is appropriate that a more detailed analysis be presented to the next meeting of this Committee.

2 RISK ASSESSMENT

2.1 Legal

Both Authorities have a legal obligation to prepare a Core Strategy and other elements of the Local Development Framework under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.2 Financial

The costs of preparing the Joint Core Strategy are included in each Authority’s respective budgets.

2.3 Corporate Risk

3 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

4 CONTACT INFORMATION

Mike Hase, Planning Policy Manager Tel No. 01629 761251 [email protected]

Hilary Senior, Principal Planning Officer Tel No. 0845 1297777 Ext 3651 [email protected]

5 BACKGROUND PAPERS

Description Date File PPS 12: Local Development Frameworks June 2008 G/5/P2 Town and Country Planning (Local 27th June 2008 G/5/P2 Development) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008

Report And Minutes To Derbyshire Dales and 27th July 2009 G/5/P2 High Peak Joint Core Strategy Advisory Committee

6 NOT CONFIDENTIAL – For public release Item No. 6

DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK JOINT CORE STRATEGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2 NOVEMBER 2009

Report of Head of Planning Services and Head of Regeneration

JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY PROPOSED CORE STRATEGY STRUCTURE & POLICIES

SUMMARY

This report sets out the proposed structure of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy, the suggested development strategy and the proposed policy content and direction.

RECOMMENDATIONS

1. That Members comments made in respect of the draft structure for the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy as set out in Appendix 1, and the policy directions as set out in Appendix 2, be taken into account in the preparation of the draft Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy. 2. That a report on the proposed development strategy to be included in the draft Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy be subject of a report to the next meeting of this Committee.

WARDS AFFECTED

All Wards outside the Peak District National Park.

STRATEGIC LINK

The Joint Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Core Strategy will be a pivotal tool in the delivery of the both Council’s Corporate Plans and Sustainable Communities Strategy.

1 REPORT

Introduction

1.1 At the meeting held on 27th July 2009 the response to the Issues and Options Consultation was considered and a further more focussed consultation on the growth options was discussed. This further consultation exercise concluded on 1st October 2009 (see separate report) and so the Councils can now proceed to the preparation of the draft strategy.

1.2 The content of the Core Strategy has to be derived from a combination of the evidence base, National Planning Policy, Regional Plan Policy, the Issues & Options and Growth Options consultations, comparison with good practice and discussion with the Government Office. Core Strategies differ from the Local Plans previously prepared by both councils in that they are a much more succinct and strategic document.

7 Policy Context

1.3 National Guidance on the preparation of Development Plans is contained within Planning Policy Statement 12 (PPS12) and indicates that Core Strategies should include:-

an overall vision which sets out how the area and the places within it should develop; strategic objectives for the area focussing on the key issues to be addressed; a delivery strategy for achieving these objectives; how much development is intended to happen where, when, and by what means it will be delivered. Locations for strategic development should be indicated on a key diagram; and clear arrangements for managing and monitoring the delivery of the strategy.

1.4 In addition, PPS 12 also indicates that the Core Strategies must:-

be prepared in accordance with the Local Development Scheme and in compliance with the Statement of Community Involvement and the Regulations; be subject to a sustainability appraisal; have regard to national policy; conform generally to the Regional Spatial Strategy; and have regard to any sustainable community strategy for its area (i.e. County and District).

1.5 The Strategy must also meet the tests of Soundness. To be “sound” a core strategy should be justified, effective and consistent with national policy.

1.6 “Justified ” means that the document must be:-

founded on a robust and credible evidence base; the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.

1.7 “Effective ” means that the document must be:-

deliverable flexible able to be monitored

1.8 Finally, the Strategy must also conform to the provisions of the East Midlands Regional Plan. As well as general policies for that apply across the whole region, the Plan also contains policies that relate specifically to the Peak Sub Region (Policies 8, 9 & 10). The plan may be viewed at:-

http://www.goem.gov.uk/497296/docs/229865/East_Midlands_Regional_Plan2.pdf

The Structure of the Strategy

1.9 The proposed structure of the Core Strategy is set out in Appendix 1. The format is designed to make a strong link to the Community Strategy and is similar to that adopted by other Authorities. The Development Strategy creates the essential framework for the future development of, firstly, the overall sub region and, secondly, the growth of each individual District.

8 1.10 Following on from the development strategy are a series of strategic policies. These are based on the following themes which were considered at the July Committee:-

Promoting Peak District Character Enhancing Natural Assets Enhancing Prosperity Mitigating Climate Change A pleasant living Environment

1.11 Finally, the Strategy will include a limited number of spatial priorities for each sub area, together with a section on how the strategy as a whole will be delivered.

The Policy Direction

1.12 The preparation of the development strategy requires careful consideration of the responses to the Issues and Options and Growth Options consultations, along with the results of Sustainability Appraisal of both the Growth Options and the alternative sites suggested during the Growth Options consultation. Given that not all of this work has been completed, it is considered appropriate that a detailed report be presented to the next meeting of this Committee on this element of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy.

1.13 Appendix 2 sets out an outline of each of the policy areas described in paragraph 1.10 above. In each case, the national and regional policy context is set out together with the main local issues before a suggested policy approach is advocated. In some cases, different options are presented for consideration.

1.14 Members’ views are requested on the proposed structure of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy set out in Appendix 1 and the suggested policy approaches set out in Appendix 2. Comments made by Members in relation to these two areas will be taken into consideration in the preparation of the draft Core Strategy which will be presented for consideration by this Committee in January 2010.

1.15 Between the November meeting and the January meeting, the draft policies will be subject to the statutory process of Sustainability Appraisal and Habitat Regulation Assessment. This process will refine the strategy further and may lead to amendments where necessary. Further details of this process will be reported to this Committee in January.

2 RISK ASSESSMENT

2.1 Legal

Both Authorities have a legal obligation to prepare a Core Strategy and other elements of the Local Development Framework under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

2.2 Financial

The costs of preparing the Joint Core Strategy are included in each Authority’s respective budgets.

9 2.3 Corporate Risk

The Joint Core Strategy will be a pivotal tool in the delivery of each Council’s Corporate Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy. In order to fulfil this role, it is necessary to ensure that robust evidence-based and “sound” documents are prepared. Failure to do so will undermine the ability of both Councils to achieve its key aims and objectives.

3 OTHER CONSIDERATIONS

4 CONTACT INFORMATION

Mike Hase, Planning Policy Manager Tel No. 01629 761251 [email protected]

Hilary Senior, Principal Planning Officer Tel No. 0845 129777 Ext 3651 [email protected]

5 BACKGROUND PAPERS

Description Date File PPS 12: Local Spatial Planning June 2008 G/5/P2 Town and Country Planning (Local Development) 27th June 2008 G/5/P2 (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008

Report And Minutes To Derbyshire Dales and High 27th July 2009 G/5/P2 Peak Joint Core Strategy Advisory Committee

APPENDIX 1

DERBYSHIRE DALES & HIGH PEAK JOINT CORE STRATEGY

PROPOSED STRUCTURE

Section Sub section Policies

Spatial High Peak A description of the physical, economic and social Portrait characteristics of the area, highlighting key issues

Derbyshire As above Dales

Vision A Vision for the future of the Area, adopted from the Joint Community Strategy Strategic Objectives How the Vision will be developed and carried forward, adapted from the Community Strategy Objectives

Development Overall The Peak Sub Region Strategy strategy This will set the overall approach for the Peak Sub Region outside the National Park.

High Peak Spatial Strategy for High Peak The detailed strategy for the Borough – including Strategic Housing / Employment Sites

Derbyshire Spatial Strategy for Derbyshire Dales Dales The detailed strategy for the District – including Strategic Housing / Employment Sites

11 Policy 1 Protection of the Na tional Park Strategic Promoting Policy to protect the amenity & setting of the National Policies Peak District Park Character Policy 2 Landscape Character A convergence of current HP & DD policies – a high level policy backed up by SPD. Recent character study to inform this policy, future SPD and choice of strategic sites

Policy 3 Good Design Design which supports the distinctive character of the peak district (including new design), a sense of place, sustainable design & materials

Policy 4 Peak District Heritage Protection & enhancement of listed Buildings, conservation areas, archaeology & use of materials. Tailored to the needs of the Peak sub Region.

Enhancing Policy 5 Maintaining & Enhancing Biodiversity Natural Protection and promotion of the sub region’s biodiversity. Assets Supplementing, not repeating PPS9. Refer to local genetic origin

Policy 6 Open Space & Green Infrastructure Maintaining and enhancing open space. The preamble will need to explain green infrastructure. Detail to follow in SPD

Policy 7 Protection of Amenity, Noise, Air & light Pollution. Policy to cover residential and other amenity and all forms of pollution. Refer to tranquility

Policy 8 Water quality Protection of Ground water, Nitrate sensitivity, mineral water protection

Policy 9 Flood Risk Building on the SFRA advice – not duplicating PPS25

12 Enhancing Policy 10 Promoting a Buoyant Peak District Prosperity Economy Over-arching policy to promote growth in the local economy. Preamble to refer to farm diversification, broadband and live work units

Policy 11 Promoting Peak District Tourism & Culture The scale location and nature of visitor attraction and accommodation. Deflecting from the National Park

Policy 12 Maintaining & enhancing an Economic Base Safeguarding major strategic employment sites – allocation of new employment land where appropriate.

Policy 13 Redeveloping an Industrial Legacy. Promoting the mixed use of constrained and poorly located industrial sites

Policy 14 Peak District Retail Hierarchy Establishing the settlements which are suitable for a concentration of retail development

Policy 15 Strategic Retail sites Sites suitable for significant convenience or comparison shopping

Mitigating Policy 16 Low Carbon development Climate To include use of renewables, code for sustainable Change homes, carbon emission targets

Policy 17 Energy Generation On and off site generation

A pleasant Policy 18 Affordable housing living Setting out the Types, thresholds, and amount of Environment affordable housing. Will be backed up by a Supplementary Planning Document

Policy 19 Community Safety Design and Crime, safe living and working environments

Policy 20 Gypsy and travellers Site allocations Criteria based policy to assess site suggestions

Policy 21 Community infrastructure The physical and social requirements of new development

13 Glossopdale Sub area Specific Spatial policies for the area Policies Central Specific Spatial policies for the area Buxton Specific Spatial policies for the area Matlock Specific Spatial policies for the area Ashbou rne Specific Spatial policies for the area

Southern Parishes Specific Spatial policies for the area

Delivery How the strategy will be delivered on the ground – timing, infrastructure requirements, the role of other agencies and partners.

14 STRATEGIC POLICIES – PROMOTING PEAK DISTRICT CHARACTER

Policy 1 Protection of the National Park

National and Regional Policy

Nationally designated areas such as the Peak District National Park have been confirmed by the Government as having the highest status of protection in relation to landscape and scenic beauty. PPS7 Sustainable Development in Rural Areas states that the conservation of the natural beauty of the landscape and countryside should be given great weight in the planning process. National Park designation confers the highest status of protection for landscape and scenic beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage and promotes opportunities for public understanding and enjoyment of their special qualities.

The East Midlands Regional Plan (RSS) published in March 2009 provides the framework for the strategic context of the Peak Sub Region and places conservation and enhancement of the National Park at the heart of Sub Regional policies. The Peak District National Park is a unique asset, not only for the people who live and work there, but also for the East Midlands, surrounding regions and nation as a whole. Policy 8 of RSS establishes the spatial priorities in and around the Peak Sub Region, stating “The preparation of policies and programmes in and around the Sub Area should; help to secure the conservation and enhancement of the Peak District National Park, respecting the statutory purposes of its designation.”

Local Issues and Evidence Base

The Peak District National Park is sandwiched between the two planning areas for High Peak and Derbyshire Dales. The landscape of the Peak District National Park is a complex combination of both physical and cultural elements, the character of which has been created over a long period of time to produce a landscape of particularly high quality. The quality of the Peak Park environment, its protection and enhancement is important for quality of life and also for the social and economic benefits it brings to the area and local community.

Key local issues to be addressed by this policy include:

- How to protect and enhance specially designated landscapes; - How to manage and support recreation and tourism within the Park; - Protect the character of the landscape; - Enable economic and social development for the benefit of communities; - Improve access to the Park by sustainable means.

Issues and Options Consultation Response

The main points raised through responses to Issues and Options stated that the high quality landscape and townscapes are important assets for the Core Strategy area. Responses suggested that the unique character of the Peak

15 Park needs to be enhanced and protected from harmful development, although a degree of recognition was made of the need for the Core Strategy to be flexible enough to deliver high quality design where development is needed and minimise any negative impacts.

Proposed Policy Direction

This policy should promote the need for development to respect the character and setting of the National Park and protect its overall amenity.

All development within the Core Strategy Area must accord with the special purposes of the Peak District National Park;

• To conserve and enhance the natural beauty, wildlife and cultural heritage of the National Park; • Development will not be permitted that would lead to any adverse harmful impact upon the character, setting, amenity and overarching purposes of the National Park.

Policy 2 Landscape Character

National and Regional Policy

The landscape is a complex combination of physical and cultural elements. Overarching principles in National Planning Policy guidance (primarily PPS1 PPS7) advocate the protection and enhancement of the landscape through the promotion of sustainable development.

RSS Policy 31 establishes Priorities for the Management and Enhancement of the Regions Landscape , stating that the regions natural and heritage landscapes should be protected and enhanced by; the promotion of the highest level of protection of nationally designated landscapes (Peak District National Park); the establishment of criteria based policies in LDF’s to ensure development proposals respect intrinsic landscape character in rural and urban areas; and identification of landscape and biodiversity protection and enhancement objectives through the integration of Landscape Character Assessments.

Local Issues and Evidence Base

The surrounding landscape is a complex combination of physical and cultural elements. The landscape within the Core Strategy area is of exceptionally high quality, and comprises a number of inter-related elements. The landscape shares characteristics with the neighbouring Peak District National Park, and includes landscape of national and international importance such as Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site, Registered Parks and Gardens of Special Historic Interest such as Sudbury Hall and Buxton’s Pavilion Gardens, as well as those with strong and distinctive landscape characteristics such as the gorge setting of Matlock Bath to the rolling moorlands of the Dark Peak. The landscapes of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak are the defining characteristic of the area and are a key asset in attracting economic investment and enhancing social well being.

At the local level special landscape area designations have been replaced with a series of landscape character types, which are characterised by the presence and arrangement of distinct elements within the landscape such as vegetation, settlement and topography. The characteristics of each of these landscape character types are set out in two Landscape Character SPD ,s prepared by each local planning authority. These provide guidance on the design of acceptable development within each landscape character type, as well as landscape and biodiversity enhancement opportunities. The Landscape Character SPDs inform and support the strategic policy.

Key local issues to be addressed by this policy include:

- How to protect and enhance specially designated landscapes; - How to protect and enhance landscape character; - How to protect and enhance urban landscapes;

Issues and Options Consultation Response

Issues and options responses indicated that there was support of a landscape character approach to managing development and protecting urban and rural landscapes as simply restricting development was considered too limiting, it was also noted that buildings and landscapes should be able to appropriately adapt over time.

In response to Issue ENV1 Landscape and Townscape Protection and Management, the Preferred Option was to pursue a landscape character based approach to managing development in the countryside

This approach requires landscape character to be at the forefront of policy considerations, with development allowed in the countryside if it meets a proven need and contributes to wider strategic objectives of the Core Strategy. Development should respond to local landscapes by protecting, restoring and enhancing the quality of the landscape. This approach should be applied within and outside the built up area boundaries of local settlements and within open countryside.

Proposed Policy Direction

Policy wording needs to ensure landscape character and distinctiveness is retained and enhanced, whilst ensuring principles of sustainable development are contributed towards and stipulating protection and enhancement of built and natural environmental assets.

Development proposals should demonstrate that they are informed by and sympathetic to distinctive landscape character areas as identified in the Landscape Character SPDs.

Development should illustrate that the location, scale, design, materials etc will protect, enhance and conserve the character and appearance and local distinctiveness of the landscape. The distinctive character of the landscape will comprise the environmental qualities associated with national, regional, local designations, special qualities distinctive to the area, patterns and features within the landscape i.e. woodland, hedges etc, and the distinctive character and setting of settlements.

Policy 3 Good Design

National and Regional Policy

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development and PPS3 Housing stress the crucial role good design has in the planning process and the promotion of sustainable development. PPS1 states good design ensures attractive usable, durable and adaptable places and is indivisible from good planning. Planning authorities should plan positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design for all development, including individual buildings, public and private spaces and wider area development schemes. Good design should contribute positively to making places better for people. High quality and inclusive design should be the aim of all those involved in the development process.

The East Midlands Regional Plan promotes good design stating it is essential that all new development in the region aspires to the highest standards of design and construction. Particularly important factors for design to address include adaptability to climate change, planning out crime and the fear of crime, improving resource efficiency, using local materials and promoting design that is in keeping with and enhances the local environment. Policy 2 – Promoting Better Design provides the regional planning context to good design practice, stating that the layout, design and construction of new development should be continuously improved.

Local Issues and Evidence Base

Key local issues to be addressed by this policy include:

- How to enhance the quality of design - How to encourage innovative, sustainable and locally distinctive design

Issues and Options Consultation Response

Responses from Issues and Options supported the notion that all new development should be built to a high design standards and reflect the high vernacular value of settlements. The use of locally sourced materials and development which is in keeping with local character and scale were noted as important issues.

Proposed Policy Direction

An overarching design policy will be needed to ensure the following key principles are established;

• Building design scale, siting, layout, form and fenestration are sympathetic to the character/appearance of the surrounding area; • Promotion of energy efficiency both during and post construction; • Use of sustainable construction techniques and use of locally sourced materials; • Flexibility – buildings capable of adapting to different using over time – i.e Building for Life; • Development to have no detrimental impact upon visual amenity or the wider landscape; • Planning Out Crime.

Policy 4 Peak District Heritage

National and Regional Policy

PPS1 advocates that a high level of protection should be given to the most valued townscapes. PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment advises that there should be effective protection for all aspects of the historic environment, comprising historic buildings, Conservation Areas and all integrated elements of the historic landscape. Policies should be identified for the preservation and enhancement of the historic environment in the area.

Local Issues and Evidence Base

The historic fabric of the Core Strategy Area represents a finite resource and is an irreplaceable asset. Care must be taken to ensure that they are not destroyed and policies for the protection, preservation and enhancement of the historic environment will need to be established.

The Core Strategy area includes many market towns and villages containing listed buildings and protected by Conservation Area status. However, the local historic built environment is evolving in response to numerous pressures that are placed upon it. It is important that the changes that take place in the Core Strategy area do not destroy the much valued historic assets or the areas overriding distinctive historical character. Continued protection will be required to ensure our distinctive built heritage and townscapes are preserved and enhanced.

Key local issues to be addressed by this policy include:

- How to protect, maintain and enhance the quality of historic landscape, townscapes and the built environments; - How to protect and enhance heritage assets; - How to encourage innovative, sustainable and locally distinctive design without harming the historic environment; - How to effect appropriate changes of use of valuable buildings in order that they can continue to contribute to the historic environment.

Issues and Options Consultation Response

The overriding preferred option from consultation responses was to protect the historic built environment and all elements that contribute to the historic character of settlements.

This policy approach would ensure the historic character of settlements is conserved. The future use of landmark buildings would be kept under review to prevent dereliction of historic mill buildings, with new development built to a high design standard using locally sourced materials to maintain the character of settlements. Conservation Area boundaries kept under review to ensure all building and localities of special interest are appropriately protected.

Proposed Policy Direction

There is scope for an overarching strategic policy to address the need to create a sense of place by strengthening the distinctive historical characteristics and preserving/enhancing the qualities of towns and village- scapes across Core Strategy area.

Policy should aim to ensure the following principles:

• Preservation and enhancement of the historic character and form of settlements • Ensure high quality design and the use of appropriate materials in areas of historic merit • Important buildings, open spaces, views, trees, walls and other natural and man made features which contribute to the special architectural or historic character of the area will be protected from harmful development. • Protection and enhancement of Conservation Areas and Listed Buildings and Archaeology.

STRATEGIC SECTION 2: ENHANCING NATURAL ASSETS

Policy 5 - Maintaining And Enhancing Biodiversity

National & Regional Policy

The Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act, 2006 places a duty on public authorities to ensure that biodiversity is taken into account in all policy and decision making, including Core Strategies.

Planning Policy Statement 9:Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS 9) advises local planning authorities to make biodiversity part of the development of policy on sustainable communities; include beneficial biodiversity and geological features within new designs for building and open spaces

In addition PPS 9 encourages local planning authorities to:

• Protect, maintain and enhance biodiversity and geological conservation interests; with the highest level of protection provided for our most valued landscapes and environmental Resources; conserve and manage SSSIs and local wildlife sites

• Promote the recovery of declining species and habitats; restore degraded Wildlife Sites and geological conservation interests; create new areas for wildlife

• Enable opportunities for everyone to enjoy the natural environment, including through community action and volunteering

• Identify and support ways that biodiversity can add to the local economy, for example through tourism related to the quality of the natural environment; provide appropriate leisure opportunities to enable urban and rural dwellers to enjoy the wider countryside. (PPS7)

• Identify and deliver the green infrastructure needed to enable the amount, type and distribution of development proposed for the area.

• Promote the dispersal of species through provision of a network of corridors and stepping stones for wildlife; create a diverse mosaic of linked habitats

Local Issues / Evidence Base

The Core Strategy area benefits from a rich biodiversity. There is a raft of international and national designated sites and accompanying policy

23 guidance, which has afforded protected status to a high number of species and habitats.

The sub region is dominated by the South Pennines moors SAC, the Peak District Moors SPA and the Peak District Dale SAC. As well as these designations of European importance there are numerous SSSi’s and Sites of County importance for nature conservation.

Many of these designations are located close to centres of population. Accordingly a key issue which the core strategy must address is how these designations can be protected, developed and maintained.

Issues & Options Responses

The response to the Issues and options on this subject was in many ways split along conventional development / conservation lines. For the most part the development industry opposed a restrictive approach in response to nature conservation interests but supported the concept of new development contributing to biodiversity through habitat creation and other measures. The conservation lobby accordingly mostly took the opposite view. Natural England and the Derbyshire Wildlife Trust took a more even-handed approach. Some commented that it was unclear as to how the challenge of maintaining and enhancing biodiversity would be achieved.

Proposed Policy Direction

Strategic policy direction needs to ensure areas of biodiversity interest will be protected from harm, with opportunities for enhancement and restoration of habitats/designated sites sought where appropriate. Aim to both protect and promote the distinct biodiversity qualities of the Peak Sub Region.

Policy needs to ensure development does not result in fragmentation of habitats and consider cumulative impacts.

Development will not be allowed where it would result in harm to a protected species or its habitat, unless the need for and the benefits of the development clearly outweigh the harm.

For sites of importance for nature conservation, existing Local Plan policy could still be considered relevant:

Development which individually or cumulatively with other development may affect a proposed or designated site of European importance will be subject to be subject to rigorous examination and will only be permitted where:

There are no imperative reasons of overriding public interest for the development such as human health or public safety, or for beneficial consequences of primary importance for nature conservation

24 There is no alternative solution; and

Development in or likely to affect Sites of Special Scientific Interest will be subject to special scrutiny and will only be permitted where: measures are put in place to ensure the protection and enhancement of the site’s nature conservation interest. the reasons for development clearly outweigh the nature conservation value of the site itself; and

Development likely to have an adverse effect on Local Nature Reserves, a Local Wildlife Site or a Regionally Important Geological Site will only be permitted where:

• measures are in place to ensure appropriate mitigation and compensatory measures including the management of such provision • it can be clearly demonstrated that there are reasons for the proposal that outweigh the need to safeguard the substantive nature conservation value of the site;

Policy 6 - Open Space And Green Infrastructure

National & Regional Policy

PPS 9 advises that local planning authorities should aim to maintain networks of natural habitats by avoiding or repairing the fragmentation and isolation of natural habitats through policies in plans. Such networks should be protected from development, and, where possible, strengthened by or integrated within it.

Local planning authorities are also advised that they should also identify and deliver the green infrastructure needed to enable the amount, type and distribution of development proposed for the area. It is envisaged that this will promote the dispersal of species through provision of a network of corridors and stepping stones for wildlife; create a diverse mosaic of linked habitats. The preparation of a Green Infrastructure Strategy is envisaged as being the most appropriate tool to achieve this.

The creation of a strategic network of multi-user routes/greenways for walkers, cyclists, horse-riders and others is encouraged. The West Derbyshire and High Peak Greenway Strategy, and its implementation by Derbyshire County Council will contribute to achieving this national objective.

Local Issues / Evidence Base

The Peak Sub Region is unusually blessed in terms of green infrastructure, with a good combination of local and national assets. A series of National trails traverse the sub region – the Pennine way, Pennine bridleway, Pennine cycleway and Trans Pennine Trail all pass through the area.

The area has also many local trails and a good variety of formal and informal green spaces. The key issue is therefore the protection of existing infrastructure and how best to secure new infrastructure in the future.

Issues and Options Responses.

There was widespread support for the concept of enhanced green infrastructure. Many highlighted the role of existing open spaces in this regard and the need for community involvement. Others referred to the need for incentives for land owners to participate in such schemes.

Proposed Policy Direction

The Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy policy should seek to maximise opportunities for the creation of new open spaces, new green infrastructure and networks of sites allocated for development. There is a

26 need to maintain and enhance green infrastructure networks and promote links to urban areas and countryside;

Policy wording should seek to support proposals that protect, enhance existing recreational and amenity assets and those that would result in a net gain of facilities.

Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy policy should seek to achieve net gain in GI across area – through protection/enhancement of assets, networks and creation of new multifunctional areas of green space to promote recreation, tourism, education, biodiversity, water management, enhancement of local landscape etc.

Policy should stipulate that development will not be permitted if it would compromise the integrity of existing GI and should seek to in corporate green infrastructure into new developments.

The promotion of high standards of environmental design, informed by landscape and environmental setting should be included.

There is an overarching need to address delivery mechanisms for instance use of developer contributions to facilitate provision, enhancement, restoration and maintenance of open space and GI.

The Green Infrastructure Network is the multifunctional network of green space which sits within and contributes to the type of high quality natural and built environment required to deliver sustainable communities.

A comprehensive Green Infrastructure network will make a valuable contribution to the quality of recreation and tourism in the area, strengthen biodiversity through habitat protection and the creation of wildlife corridors, improve accessibility for local residents by offering safe routes to walk and cycle and makes and will also contribute to water management through SUDS.

New development should make a net contribution to the strategic network of Green Infrastructure, either through the protection and enhancement of existing assets or through the creation of new green infrastructure nodes and corridors including parks and pitches, allotments, bridleways and cycleways. Improvements to the Green Infrastructure Network will be facilitated through developer contributions where gaps in the strategic network have been identified. Sub-regional linkages will be developed to improve accessibility to the National Park for tourism and recreation

Policy 7 - Protecting Amenity, Noise, Air And Light Pollution

National & Regional Policy

The planning system plays a key role in determining the location of development that may give rise to pollution, either directly or indirectly. The planning system should also seek to ensure that other uses and major existing or potential sources of pollution do not, as far as possible, affect developments. (PPS23)

The East Midlands Environment Strategy identifies that within the East Midlands the two main sources of pollutants affecting air quality are transport and industry.

The National Air Strategy sets out that pollutants from sources such as cars and industrial plants can lead to levels of pollution which are have an adverse effect on health and the natural environment.

Furthermore light pollution has the potential to destroy the view of the night sky and can harm the quality of life of those who suffer from it.

PPS 24 – Planning and Noise sets out that noise can have a significant effect on the environment and on the quality of life enjoyed by individuals and communities.

Local Issues / Evidence Base

Issues of amenity are universal ones affecting all areas. However the characteristics of the sub region make certain aspects more pertinent than others.

The topography of the area means many settlements are built on sloping ground. New development is likely to follow a similar pattern. In this context questions of overlooking and overshadowing frequently arise as homes and other properties are built on different levels. In the same way, aspect and sunlight are similarly affected by topography. In many cases the existing urban form in the Peak sub Region is tight knit and would not conform to modern standards of space, privacy and light. Accordingly development within such existing buildings requires additional care.

Issues & Options Response

There was limited comment on this subject

Proposed Policy Direction

Policy needs to address typical factors that may affect amenity by virtue of overshadowing, loss of light, overbearing, noise, pollution fumes etc. Similarly policy should refer to protection of countryside tranquillity and dark skies.

Development proposals should seek to ensure that communities and the environment are not adversely affected. Proposals should have consideration of the need to mitigate development from the consequences of pollution, noise, and hazardous activities

Planning Permission will be granted for development provided that:

It will not create unacceptable loss of, nor suffer from unacceptable levels of, privacy or general amenity, particularly as a result of:

• overlooking; • loss of daylight and sunlight; • overbearing effects of development; • air, water, noise, light and other pollution; • risk from hazardous substances and processes; • traffic safety and generation

Where appropriate, conditions will be imposed and/or planning obligations sought, to ensure amelioration measures are taken to adequately address the impacts on amenity

Policy 8 - Water Quality

National & Regional Policy

Regional Plan Policy 2 advocates the use of Sustainable Urban Drainage Systems as a means of managing surface water run-off. Furthermore Regional Plan Policy 32 places an emphasis on joint working between local authorities, developers, the Environment Agency and other relevant agencies to take water related issues into account at an early stage in the process of identifying land for development and in the phasing and implementation of development, as well as reducing unsustainable abstraction from watercourses and aquifers to sustainable levels; protecting and improving water quality and reduce the risk of pollution especially to vulnerable groundwater; and that there is the necessary infrastructure in place

Local Issues / Evidence Base

The area contains a number of major aquifers that provide high quality water that requires little treatment prior to use. Buxton Mineral Water also currently enjoys a specific protected catchment. Protection of groundwater resources most at risk of pollution is very important. The question of how water is used and managed will become crucial as increases in demand and climate change put pressure on resources.

The use of Sustainable Urban Drainage schemes has often been frustrated by opposition form Utility companies who prefer hard engineering solutions for their ease of maintenance. The Regional Plan in advocating the use of SuDS, Local Planning Authorities sets out that local authorities should ensure that any uncertainties over adoption and future maintenance are resolved early in the development process.

Issues & Options Response

There was widespread support for the protection of water resources. Some also made the link to water and soil conservation

Proposed Policy Direction

• New development should not cause detrimental harm to groundwater or surface water resources, during construction or upon completion through increased surface runoff, groundwater leaching or discharge. • New development should incorporate the use of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) except in exceptional circumstances where there is a risk of adverse groundwater pollution (Ground Source Protection Zones and Buxton Mineral Water Catchment Area) • All development should have regard to the potential flood risk of an area

Policy 9 - Flood Risk

National & Regional Policy

PPS25 requires that local planning authorities undertake a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) to provide evidence on flood risk areas taking into account other sources of flooding and the impact of climate change. PPS25 advises that the SFRA is important in informing potential future land allocations and policy in the Local Development Frameworks.

Flood Risk policy within the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy should build upon and not reiterate national policy outlined in PPS25. Furthermore it needs to ensure that development does not increase the risk of flooding on site or elsewhere,

PPS25 states that local planning authorities will: -

• Ensure developments have a Flood Risk Assessment where appropriate, • Apply the sequential approach to minimise flood risk by matching the vulnerability of land use to flood risk. • Give priority to the use of SUDS. • Ensure development in flood risk areas is appropriately flood resilient and resistant.

Local Issues / Evidence Base

Derbyshire Dales District Council, High Peak Borough Council and the Peak District National Park Authority commissioned a Level 1 SFRA in accordance with the advice within PPS25. The purpose of the SFRA was to assess and map all forms of flood risk from groundwater, surface water, sewer and river sources, taking into account future climate change predictions, and to use this as an evidence base to locate future development, primarily in low flood risk areas.

High Peak Borough's plan area drains into two major river catchments. The northern and central parts of the plan area drain into the Goyt and Etherow rivers, which ultimately drain into the River Mersey. The southern part of the plan area drains into the River Wye, which ultimately drains into the River Trent. With climate change, the Borough's risk areas are likely to flood more frequently, and flooding from other sources is also likely to increase.

In Derbyshire Dales the main rivers are the Derwent that flows southwards towards Derby and the Dove that forms the south-western boundary of the District.

Issues & Options Response

Some commented that the impact of flooding was highly localised and therefore it was a matter to be considered on a site-by-site basis. Others made the link back to sustainable drainage and the need to avoid hard surfacing in urban areas. Most acknowledged the importance of flood protection.

Proposed Policy Direction

The Sequential Approach should be applied within development sites to inform site layout, by locating the most vulnerable elements of a development in the lowest risk areas (in accordance with Table D3 of PPS25). The use of Flood Zones 2 and 3 for recreation, amenity and environmental purposes can provide an effective means of flood risk management as well as providing connected green spaces with consequent social and environmental benefits.

All development should take account of the following requirements: • Use the Sequential Test to locate new development in least risky areas, giving highest priority to Flood Zone 1 • Use the Sequential Approach within development sites to inform site layout by locating the most vulnerable elements of a development in the lowest risk areas, in accordance with Table D3 of PPS25 • Protect the functional floodplain from development, promote the use of green corridors in flood risk areas and restore the natural course of rivers. These will all act as a means of risk reduction • Seek to reinstate functional floodplain wherever possible (e.g. reduce building footprints or relocate to lower flood risk zones) • Ensure all new development is ‘safe’, meaning that dry pedestrian access to and from the development is possible without passing through the 1 in 100 year plus climate change floodplain, emergency vehicular access is possible, and flood resistance and resilience is incorporated • No new building should be allowed in a flood risk area that is not flood resilient • Require the use of SUDS in all Flood Zones for both Brownfield and Greenfield sites, to achieve Greenfield discharge rates with a minimum reduction of 20%. Space should be set-aside for SUDS. • Seek developer contributions (to be determined in consultation with the Environment Agency) via S106 planning obligations to fund (or part fund) strategic flood risk management facilities (such as storage areas) and bring benefit to the wider community • Safeguard possible sites for flood storage and other channel works

32 STRATEGIC SECTION 3 - ENHANCING PROSPERITY

Policy 10 - Promoting A Buoyant Peak District Economy

National & Regional Policy

Regional Plan Policy 20 (Regional Priorities for Employment Land) promotes the development of priority sectors included within the Regional Economic Strategy, as well as locally significant economic sectors 1.

Regional Plan Policy 20 also supports rural diversification. PPS7 and the draft PPS4 also call for rural diversification, including the re-use of rural buildings primarily for business purposes. Home working practices, including live/work are encouraged by Policy EC4 of the draft PPS4.

RSS Policy 9 (Spatial Priorities outside the National Park) advocates the retention and growth of local firms and emphasises the need for new development to respects the high quality environment of the area.

Local Issues - Evidence Base

A buoyant local economy is key to ensuring that the quality of life for residents is maintained.

The Peak District Rural Action Zone Action Plan 2008 – 2011 and the Peak Sub-Region Employment Land Review have identified several key sectors of the economy, that if nurtured, can form an increasingly important role in the local economy by offering a wider range of high skill / high wage jobs - a key objective of the Sustainable Community Strategy. These include the creative industries, knowledge-based industries, food and drink and tourism sectors.

It is considered that as such proposals for development associated with the creative industries, knowledge-based industries, food and drink and tourism sectors should be supported. Furthermore given the scale of the agriculture industry in the area sustainable farm diversification schemes should also be supported as a means of achieving a broader economic base.

Research undertaken as part of the Employment Land Review, and as part of the Ashbourne Economic Assessment indicates that the local environment and quality of life offered by the area is a key locational advantage for local businesses. New development should therefore ensure that the design and appearance of any new buildings is well related to the character and appearance of the surrounding area.

1 The Regional Economic Strategy (RES) for the East Midlands 2006-2020 — A Flourishing Region — identifies four key sectors that are expected to make the greatest contribution to the regional economy. They are: Transport equipment; Food and drink; Healthcare and bioscience; Sustainable construction. These sectors were selected on the basis of a number of measures including: The potential for high quality jobs; Providing good prospects for growth;Having a significant presence in the East Midlands

An overarching objective of all of the elements of this policy is to reduce the high levels of unsustainable out commuting that are prevalent across the plan area. 40% of High Peak residents in employment work outside of the Borough, in Derbyshire Dales the figure is 35%. 2 Car borne commuter journeys are a major cause of congestion, which is in turn damaging to the economy.

The diversification of the local economy, home working, and support high / skill high wage developments will help to counter this trend. Reducing the need to travel is a policy objective reflected across national and regional guidance. The availability of broadband is a significant issue in many of the more rural areas of the plan area. The lack of broadband is a significant deterrent to new businesses establishing in these areas, and in encouraging home working.

The need to preserve and enhance the character of the area increases local job opportunities, reduce out commuting and traffic congestion were major issues raised during the Issues and Options consultation.

Issues and Options Consultation Response

Encouraging new business to locate in the Core Strategy area was seen as a key aim of the Strategy, improving local job prospects and reducing the need to travel to work. Ensuring that there are enough quality premises was considered to be an important element of achieving this aim and should be done through a combination of new sites and the redevelopment of existing employment land. All employment development should be suitably designed and located to minimise environmental impact and mitigate against climate change

Proposed Policy Direction

Development that accords with the character of the Peak District whilst improving local job opportunities will be encouraged. In particular, support will be given for indigenous businesses, priority sectors specified in the Regional Economic Strategy and developments in the following locally significant sectors of the economy:

• Creative industries • Knowledge-based industries • Tourism • Food & drink

Other new or emerging sectors will be supported if they benefit a buoyant Peak District economy.

2 Census 2001

34 Economic related development should be predominantly located within the main market towns. Proposals for more rural development, including farm diversification and the conversion of rural buildings to employment uses, including those currently vacant or derelict will also be encouraged.

Proposals to enable home-working, including live / work developments will be encouraged.

Support for improvements in the availability of broadband across the plan area will be lobbied for.

The scale, design, impact on local amenity and accessibility (particularly by public transport, walking and cycling) of such proposals will be amongst the determining factors in such circumstances. Travel Plans should be required to accompany proposals to demonstrate how sustainable access needs will be managed.

35 Policy 11 - Promoting Peak District Tourism And Culture

National & Regional Policy

Regional Plan Policy 10 - Managing Tourism and Visitors in the Peak Sub- Area and Policy 42 Regional Priorities for Tourism seek to encourage sustainable tourism opportunities (including opportunities outside the National Park.) that are both accessible and not detrimental to the environment.

PPS6 and draft PPS4, suggests that town centre locations for hotels are preferred with edge of centre and out of centre proposals to be considered against the sequential approach to site selection.

Local Issues - Evidence Base

Tourism already makes a significant contribution to the local economy with approximately 8.5 million visitors to Derbyshire Dales and High Peak during 2006 spending £300 million 3.

Key attractions within the plan area include the Pavilion Gardens in Buxton, Carsington Water and the Derwent Valley Mills World Heritage Site – although the latter has the potential to significantly improve its offer as a tourism destination. The area is also host to range of events including the Buxton Festival, Wirksworth Festival and crucially lies on the doorstep of the Peak District National Park.

Tourism also impacts on other businesses vital to the area including, retail, food and drink, creative industries and agriculture. Consequently, the sector is expected to provide an increasingly vital role in the local economy.

Much of existing visitor spending in Derbyshire Dales and High Peak is within the National Park. However, it is recognised that the main towns outside of the National Park should also support the tourism industry by acting as service centres through the provision of complementary accommodation, attractions and other facilities.

The Hotel Demand Survey – Derbyshire and the Peak District commissioned by the Derby and Derbyshire Economic Partnership in 2007 found that the Peak District suffers from lack of serviced accommodation. This conflicts with the desire to increase overnight stays as they increase the level of visitor spending. Planned developments such as the Crescent Spa Hotel in Buxton will help to address the situation, however, the study suggests that Buxton, Ashbourne, Matlock and Glossop would be suitable locations for additional hotels. This stance is broadly supported by the Tourism Investment Opportunities Assessment: Derbyshire and Peak District (East Midlands Tourism).

3 STEAM 2006 data

Issues and Options Consultation Response

Whilst there was not a specific reference in the Issues and Options Consultation Document relating to tourism and culture the following comments were received:

“As the district is a major tourist destination we are surprised there is not a dedicated section for this topic.”

“The document does make some references to the importance of the tourist industry but there are no spatial options to consider for this vital part of your economy. We suggest a section be included on Tourism & Cultural Facilities which would detail the uses and activities that relate to your arts venues, culture and tourism including hotels, guest houses, bed and breakfast accommodation, theatres and concert halls, museums and galleries, etc.”

There was also broad support for the growth of tourism. In particular, the requirement to promote tourist related development that links to the National Park and which eases the pressure for development in the Park itself were highlighted.

Proposed Policy Direction

Strengthen the areas tourism role by supporting and supplementing the offer of the National Park by:

• Supporting additional visitor accommodation to encourage more overnight stays. New hotel and serviced accommodation will be particularly encouraged in; Buxton, Ashbourne, Matlock and Glossop. • Encouraging the provision of new visitor attractions and infrastructure

New accommodation and facilities should be accessible, particularly by public transport, walking and cycling. Travel Plans should be required to accompany proposals to demonstrate how sustainable access needs will be managed.

New accommodation and facilities should of an appropriate design and should not unduly harm sites designated for their environmental or conservation value.

37 Policy 12 - Maintaining And Enhancing An Economic Base

National & Regional Policy

Draft PPS4 recommends that where necessary, land should be safeguarded for economic development purposes. It also states that previously developed land should be prioritised when bringing forward new employment related development. The safeguarding of existing (and predominantly brownfield) employment sites will help to meet this objective.

Local Issues - Evidence Base

The Peak Sub-Region Employment Land Review recommended an employment land requirement that broadly reflected past patterns of take-up as the basis for future planning. It advised that the future employment land requirements for the Core Strategy area should be in the order of 51ha distributed as follows:

Gross Employment Land Requirements 2008 - 2026 (Hectares) Derbyshire High Core Strategy Area

Dales Peak Total Industrial Land 13.5 26 39.5 Office/Non Industrial 2.5 9 11.5 Land Total 16 35 51

The Employment Land Review also advised that the approach should be to maintain a ‘portfolio’ of employment sites that broadly achieves this level of land supply in each area, consisting of sites which have a reasonable prospect of coming forward. The Employment Land Review emphasised the point that these estimates are not maximum requirements for employment land but represent that which is capable of being delivered over the plan period, reflecting the emphasis on implementation from Government Guidance in PPS12.

The Employment Land Review found that there is a shortage of sites and premises suitable for modern business needs. It also suggested that there was a need to safeguard some sites that may appear to be poor quality and visually unattractive but that play a vital role in terms of meeting the demand for low rent business accommodation for small industrial firms.

The need to safeguard land is considered to be of strategic importance to the local economy particularly in the context of the shortage of locally available jobs (particularly in high skill / high wage positions) and the resultant high rates of out commuting.

Issues and Options Consultation Response

The preferred option that emerged from the Issues and Options Consultation was to identify some new employment land and encourage re-development of existing employment sites to meet the needs of modern businesses .

This provides most flexibility in meeting modern business needs by providing a balanced portfolio of sites. The redevelopment of existing sites within or adjacent to existing settlements brings the potential benefits of reducing journeys made by car and utilising Brownfield sites. Identifying new employment land has the benefit of allocating sites that are capable of meeting the needs of the emerging growth sectors as the creative and knowledge based industries.

Directing new employment away from areas of high environmental quality, including Greenfield sites was also preferred during the Issues and Options Consultation.

By directing the location of new business and industrial development away from areas of high environmental quality (including the restriction of development on Greenfield sites) it risks having a negative impact on the development of the local economy, including growth of emerging sectors such as creative and knowledge-based industries. Some Greenfield sites may be more appropriate for well-designed business and industrial development, especially if there are good public transport links and close proximity to other services and facilities.

Proposed Policy Direction

Existing Strategic Employment sites should be safeguarded for economic development as defined by the draft PPS4 (B use classes and development that creates employment opportunities, wealth or an economic output). Town centres uses (retail, leisure etc.) should generally be excluded. Strategic employment sites are as follows:

High Peak

• Staden Lane, Buxton? • Harpur Hill Industrial Estate? • Tongue Lane, Buxton? • Waterswallows Road, Buxton? • Sheffield Road, Chapel-en-le-Frith? • Bowden Lane, Chapel-en-le-Frith? • Bingswood, Whaley Bridge? • Surrey Street, Glossop? • Rossington Park, Hadfield?

39 • Dinting Vale? • Glossop Road, Gamesley?

Derbyshire Dales

• Clifton Road, Ashbourne • Ashbourne Airfield, Ashbourne • Henmore Trading Estate, Ashbourne • Brookfield Park, Tansley • Lime Tree Business Park • Matlock Bakewell Road, Matlock (Twigg’s Fabricators) • Dale Road North, Darley Dale (Firth Rixon) • Whitworth Road, Darley Dale (Molyneux Engineering) • Unity Garage, Darley Dale • Church Road, Darley Dale (Cobb Slater) • Station Yard, Rowsley • Peak Village, Rowsley • Ravenstor Road, Wirksworth • Kingsfield Industrial Estate, Wirksworth

New Allocations to be identified at:

• Halldale Quarry, Matlock • Ashbourne Airfield Extension • Middleton Road, Wirksworth

To help develop, or re-develop these sites for economic development purposes, they may require investment to help overcome identified constraints. Public sector assistance or end uses with a higher value than B2 or B8 (excluding housing) may be required to provide the necessary funding.

Policy 13 - Regenerating An Industrial Legacy

National & Regional Policy

PPS3 (Housing) states that local authorities should consider whether sites currently designated for business/industrial uses should be re-designated for housing. The draft PPS4 supports this and recommends that employment site allocations are not carried forward into new development plans without an evidence of need or a reasonable project of them being delivered during the plan period. In such instances, the scope of the allocation should be broadened to allow other economic development, or alternative uses such as housing. Furthermore, the draft PPS4 appears to broaden the scope of employment land by stating the economic development relates not only to the traditional B use classes, but also other development that provides employment opportunities, generates wealth or produces an economic output.

The Regional Plan does not specify the employment land requirement for the area. The identification of need is deferred to local authorities to identify through Employment Land Reviews. A broad economic objective for the Peak Sub-Region is to retain and generate local employment, however, it is recognised that sites are constrained and that sites deemed surplus to requirements should be considered for other uses.

Local Issues - Evidence Base

The Peak-Sub Region Employment Land Review considered the requirement for employment land between 2008 and 2026. The study found that in High Peak 35ha is required. However, current supply was considered to be 57ha, thus implying an oversupply of 22ha. It is important to note that whilst the study identified an oversupply in broad terms, it was acknowledged that the area suffers from a shortage of suitable sites and premises for business needs.

To help reduce the identified oversupply, the study recommended that sites that suffer from poor access, remote locations, conflict with neighbouring land uses or obsolete buildings should be considered for re-designation. The availability of public sector grants and subsidies should also be factored in decision-making. The sites listed below have been identified as potential locations for mixed-use redevelopment.

Issues and Options Consultation Response

Feedback from both the Issues and Options and Growth Option consultation indicated that there was broad support for the redevelopment of obsolete employment land to provide either new business premises or alternative uses. However, the there was also a strong call for an increase in local job opportunities so the release of sites should be carefully considered.

41 Encouraging new business to locate in the Core Strategy area was seen as a key aim of the strategy, improving local job prospects and reducing the need to travel to work. Ensuring that there are enough quality premises was considered to be an important element of achieving this aim and should be done through a combination of new sites and the redevelopment of existing employment land.

Proposed Policy Direction

An oversupply of employment land has been identified in the plan area. In addition, several sites currently designated for employment area are constrained and unlikely to be viable or suitable for employment use in their entirety in the future. As such, the following sites will be re-designated for mixed-use regeneration purposes to enable brownfield housing development. Retail and leisure may also be acceptable in some areas. This enabling development could also help to deliver suitable businesses premises:

• Dinting Vale? • Charlestown Works? • Woods Mill • Hawkeshead Mill, Old Glossop? • Britannia Mills, Buxworth? • Ferodo, Chapel-en-le-Frith? • Forge Works, Chinley? • Bingswood, Whaley Bridge? • New Mills Newtown? • Salem Mill, New Mills? • Hoffman Quarry, Harpur Hill? 4

4 Parts of Hoffman Quarry are currently being considered by Derbyshire Wild Trust as a possible Wildlife Site designation. This site would not be suitable for housing.

Policy 14 - Peak District Retail Hierarchy & New Retail Floorspace

National & Regional Policy

PPS6 and the draft PPS4 both require Local Planning Authorities to consider the network of centres and their relationship within a hierarchy. The Regional Plan states that Manchester, Derby and Sheffield are the main centres that serve Derbyshire Dales and High Peak. In addition, it recommends that retail development is mainly located outside of the National Park and seeks to provide quality schemes of a scale appropriate with historic market towns.

Local Issues - Evidence Base

The Peak Sub Region Retail Study identified the following scope for either qualitative or quantitative improvements.

Buxton - Promote the expansion of town centre food and clothing, footwear, recreational goods etc. Retail floorspace to improve choice and increase spending within the town centre. Spring Gardens is cited as a location that could be a suitable location for new floorspace

Matlock - Promote additional retail floorspace in clothing, footwear, recreational goods etc and furniture, DIY supplies, electrical appliances etc to reduce expenditure leakage to other nearby centres including Chesterfield and Derby.

Glossop - Seek the expansion of centrally located food provision and additional retail floorspace for clothing, footwear, recreational goods etc to increase spending within the town centre, enhance choice and assist regeneration. Woods Mill is cited as a location that could be suitable for new floorspace.

Wirksworth - Promote the development of a new foodstore to improve local provision and reduce the need of residents to travel to places like Matlock and Belper for their main food shop.

New Mills - Support the development of a new foodstore and reduce the need of residents to travel to Whaley Bridge or Chapel-en-le-Frith for their main food shopping. There is currently no obvious option for a suitable site to accommodate additional floorspace.

Issues and Options Consultation Response

Two possible options for a retail hierarchy were included within the Issues and Options Consultation.

43 Option 1

Main Towns – Buxton, Matlock, Glossop and Ashbourne Small Towns – Chapel-en-le-Frith, New Mills, Whaley Bridge, Wirksworth Other Centres – Cromford, Darley Dale, Matlock Bath, Hadfield, Charlesworth, Chinley and Hayfield

Under this hierarchy, the role of the main towns would be to provide for local food shopping needs and form the main centres for comparison retail. Further comparison goods retailing would therefore be focused in these centres as their scale, accessibility and catchment areas are best suited to such developments.

Small towns would fulfil a supporting role to the main centres and serve a more local catchment area. Main food shopping opportunities are currently provided in some of these centres and the focus for the future would generally be on maintaining local services and enhancing nurturing local independent retailers. The focus for other centres would be similar to that for small centres with the main difference being the scale and type of the current retail offer in other centres is generally geared towards local top-up shopping only.

Option 1 was identified within the Peak Sub Region Retail and Town Centre Study as the one that reflects the current function of the areas’ town centres.

This option received five comments in support (including from Aldi), one general comment and one objection from Tesco. Support was largely expressed on the basis that this hierarchy reflects the current network of centres. Tesco’s objection also relates to the fact that this option reflects the current hierarchy. Tesco asserted that this option offers little opportunity for a flexible response to any retail proposals that lie outside the identified 'Main Towns'.

Option 2

This hierarchy amalgamated the first two tiers of Option 1. Under this hierarchy, the determination of planning applications would have to give closer consideration to the test of appropriate scale specified in PPS6. This requires developers to justify the scale of the proposal in the context of the role and function of the catchment of the centre.

During the Issues and Options consultation, this option received three comments of support. Both Tesco and Sainsbury’s expressed support of this hierarchy as it would provide more flexibility and allow under performing centres to improve their retail offer.

Consultation responses indicated a support for a retail hierarchy that would predominantly focus major retail development in the main towns of Buxton, Matlock, Glossop and Ashbourne, whilst still allowing appropriate development in smaller settlements in line with their current roles and functions (Option 1). It was suggested that the Core Strategy should

44 strategically plan for retail growth, identifying appropriate sites for supermarkets and extending town centre boundaries where appropriate

Option SH2a: Strategically plan for retail growth where Peak Sub Region Retail Study has identified a specific need in Buxton, Matlock, Glossop, Wirksworth and New Mills (SA Score: Positive)

Directing retail growth to ensure that town centres are provided with additional retail floorspace – according to their needs – is expected to have an important positive impact on supporting the diversity and vitality of town centres. This will in turn help to reduce the number of people who travel out of the area for shopping. Promoting and supporting a vibrant town centre is also more likely to lead to an increase in the number of people staying overnight and to increase in visitor spend. Helping to meet local needs is more likely to reduce the number of journeys made by car. However directing retail growth risks restricting development and thus restricting access to jobs, facilities and services.

Proposed Policy Direction

Whilst there was more support for Option 1, there would not be any discernable difference between in the determination of planning applications for retail between main Towns and Small Towns. It is therefore considered that the retail hierarchy should be focussed based upon Option 2.

Retail Hierachy o Town centres – Buxton, Glossop, Matlock, Ashbourne, Chapel-en-le- Frith, New Mills, Whaley Bridge and Wirksworth o Other local centres and shopping parades – Cromford, Darley Dale, Matlock Bath, Hadfield, Charlesworth, Chinley and Hayfield The supporting text to this policy would also refer to the towns identified in the Peak Sub Region Retail and Town Centre Study where scope for qualitative or quantitative retail improvements has been identified: o Buxton o Matlock o Glossop o Wirksworth o New Mills General areas that are currently designated for retail purposes in the Local Plan and that could be capable of accommodating identified need could also be identified. These include the Station Road area of Buxton. Woods Mill, Glossop could also be highlighted as the designation of this site could change in the Core Strategy from a Primary Employment Zone to allow mixed-use development (considered under draft “Regenerating an Industrial Legacy” policy).

45 Strategic Section 4 – Mitigating Climate Change

POLICY 16 - LOW CARBON DEVELOPMENT

National Policy & Regional Policy

The Government places tackling climate change as one of the main issues facing the country and regards the planning system as having a key role to play in addressing it. Issues of climate change are to be integrated into all elements of spatial planning. Where appropriate the planning system should contribute to reducing emissions (mitigation) and take into account the unavoidable effects of climate change (adaptation).

Government policies seek to reduce carbon emissions, promote energy efficiency and the use of renewable low carbon technology. A range of policy documents have introduced challenging national targets to cut carbon emissions and increase the use of low carbon renewable sources of energy. The government’s long-term aim is to reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050 with real progress by 2020(Our Energy Future- Creating a Low Carbon Economy White Paper) and to increase the use of renewables and low carbon energy technologies.

Domestic homes contribute to about one third of the UK total carbon dioxide emissions and when other buildings are considered the figure is closer to one half. (PPS1 Planning and Climate Change Supplement to Planning) Tackling domestic emissions is therefore key to reducing carbon emissions. The government laid the foundations for sustainable housing development with the introduction of the code for sustainable homes (CSH) and a step by step tightening of the Building regulations to achieve zero carbon by 2016.

The table below shows the planned improvements in energy efficiency

2010 2013 2016 Energy efficiency 25% 44% Zero carbon improvement Can’t achieve compared with level 4 without part L of building some renewables regs 2006 Equivalent 3 4 6 standard within the Code

Code for Sustainable Homes Introduced in April 2007 as part of a package of measures to ensure all new homes would be zero carbon from 2016. It is a single national standard and sustainability rating for new build homes.

It looks at the overall sustainability of new dwellings against the following criteria • Energy and carbon emissions • Water • Materials • Surface water run off • Waste • Pollution • Health and wellbeing • Management • Ecology

The code sets minimum standards for energy and water use at each level. The rating depends on performance over all nine categories. There are 6 levels in the code.

From May 2008 it became mandatory for all new homes to be assessed against the code but it is not mandatory to meet the code and it is possible just to get a nil rated certificate. It is obviously required to meet building regulations. Building regulations cover the energy part of the code and also have requirements regarding water and materials.

From April 2008 all new social housing has to meet code level 3 and social housing will be one level in advance of the requirements for private housing and the building regulations.

The Regional Spatial Strategy has two key policies dealing with energy and low carbon development. A partial review of the RSS was launched in October 2008. One of the key issues to be considered by the partial review is dealing with the causes and effects of climate change by generating more power from renewable sources. The current polices in the RSS on climate change are therefore likely to change in the future.

Policy 39 Regional Priorities for Energy Reduction and Efficiency

Local Authorities, energy generators and other relevant public bodies should: • Promote a reduction of energy usage in line with the energy hierarchy; and • Develop policies and proposals to secure a reduction in the need for energy though the location of development, site layout and design

The energy hierarchy is • Reduce the need for energy • To use energy more efficiently

47 • To use renewable energy • Any continuing use of fossil fuels to be clean and efficient for heating and co-generation

Policy 40 Regional Priorities for Low Carbon Energy Development states

• To help meet national targets low energy proposals should be supported where environmental, social and economic impacts can be satisfactorily meet • Local authorities should promote the development of Combined Heat and Power (CHP) and district heating infrastructure

The RSS recognises that large scale renewables will be difficult to accommodate in the Peak Sub region. Considers there are opportunities for small-scale hydro and small wind.

Local Issues- Evidence Base

The Peak Sub region Climate Change Study

The study looked at the potential for the use of renewables in the Peak sub region. It included a landscape sensitivity assessment that looked at suitability of different landscape types to accommodate renewable technology.

Its key findings were: -

• The Peak sub region has very limited opportunities for large scale renewable energy generation. Landscape character is a constraint in many areas. • It is easier to achieve large contributions to energy demand from renewable energy/ low carbon in domestic than industrial or commercial developments • There is potential for a range of different types of renewable/low carbon technologies to be used in the Peak sub region. The table below shows the potential capacity in GW/h and the % contribution the Peak sub region can make to the East Midlands targets. There are good opportunities for solar thermal and PV, heat pumps and some medium and small scale wind technologies.

Technology Quantification of potential Target to 2026 GWh/y East % of GWh/y Midlands EM Target to targets 2026 GWh/y PDNP HPBC DDDC Sub PDNP HPBC DDDC Sub Region Region Biomass 92.9 5.9 23.2 122 4.64 0.29 1.16 6 77 8 Energy 0 0 735 735 0 0 37 37 1114 3 crops Anaerobic # 0 0 0 0 72 0 digestion Hydro 6 3.4 3.8 13.2 6 3.4 3.8 13.2 73 18 Heat 6 669 155 830 0.4 50 12 62 na Na pumps Micro solar 93 3 49 145 0.6 0.02 2.8 3.4 na Na thermal Micro PV 9 2.84 6.96 18.86 0.57 0.18 0.44 1.19 1018 1 Onshore wind large 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Medium 0 0 20 20 0 0 10 10 - Small 0.125 0.125 0.75 1 0.125 0.125 0.75 1 - Total wind 0.125 0.125 20.75 21 0.25 0.25 10.75 11 460 2.3 Micro wind 11/61 25.85 21 58.46 * * * 0.5 1832 0.03

Total 218 710 1014 1943 12.12 50.49 65.85 128.79 8339 1.5

49 APPENDIX 2

• Derbyshire Dales estimated to provide approximately 50% of renewable energy capacity of the Peak Sub Region to 2026 with 65.85 GWh/y. Main contributors’ energy crops, heat pumps and medium scale wind. • High Peak estimated to provide proximately 40% of renewable energy capacity of the Peak Sub Region to 2026 with 50.49 GWh/y.Main technology being heat pumps. • The study looked at the potential for district heating schemes in Buxton and Matlock and considered there was scope for schemes with redevelopment proposals • Looked at the potential at requiring a higher than minimum standard for the code for sustainable homes and found there maybe onerous cost implications.

Key recommendations

Recommended a Merton style targets for the % of renewable energy used in new developments. The targets were split between residential and non- residential development.

Use Renewable Energy Target (% of gross demand) Domestic 5+ or 16+ bedrooms 14% Offices, hotels, leisure 1,000msq+ 10% Other non dwellings 1,000msq+ 6%

The Study recommended consideration be given to policies in the following areas

• Energy Statement .A requirement for all new developments to have an energy statement that will demonstrate how the development complies with statutory regulation and planning policy. • Stand alone renewables policy to deal with cases of standalone renewables that could be used to export energy o the grid or district heating schemes. • Anaerobic digestion. Provision of a policy to support anaerobic digestion to include criteria to safeguard the landscape and environment. • Heating networks. Policies to secure a reduction in the need for energy through the location and design of development. Policies to encourage the energy to be considered early in the planning process. Consider identifying potential areas for district heating or combined heat and power schemes. • Decentralised energy. All developments should demonstrate their heating and power schemes have been selected to minimise carbon emissions. Major developments should evaluate combined heat and power systems and where a new system is installed as part of a scheme examine opportunities to extend the scheme beyond the site boundaries.

50 APPENDIX 2

• Set targets for renewable energy consumption using differential targets for domestic and non domestic development and set a tiered target based on planning use. • An alternative to targets could be a carbon offset fund where developers pay a fixed amount per tonne of residual annual CO2 emissions. The money is then used to support energy efficiency improvements in the existing housing stock resulting in equivalent savings.

Main Responses to Issues and Options

The Issues and Options set forwarded three key issues with a range of options.

Issue CC1: Development needs to be resilient to the effect of climate change and use sustainable resources • Option CC1a Ensure developments use sustainable design and construction techniques Issue CC2: Promote the development of energy efficient buildings • Option CC2a Require residential development to achieve a Code for Sustainable Homes standard in advance of regulation and non residential development to achieve BREEAM very good • Option CC2b To set minimum standards to comply with government regulations Issue CC3: Increase the use of renewable and low carbon energy • Option CC3a Develop energy resources wherever they are technically feasible • Option CC3b Develop renewable energy resources where they will have the least impact on the landscape, biodiversity and the historic environment • Option CC3c Merton target

The responses were split between: - • Those who wanted proactive policies to promote the use of renewables/low carbon energy and set targets higher than the statutory minimum for Code for Sustainable Homes • And those who thought current requirements are enough especially given the progressive increase in the building regulations proposed over the next few years.

Proposed Policy Direction

It is considered that there is a need for two policies dealing with the issues reducing carbon emissions. A broad policy promoting low carbon development and a specific policy dealing with stand-alone energy generation.

51 APPENDIX 2

- Low Carbon Development

The Core Strategy should seek to promote low carbon development and maximise carbon reductions in new build by reducing the need for energy, using energy more efficiently and generating energy from low carbon or renewable sources.

The main elements of this policy are to

Mitigate the effects of climate change through the promotion of low carbon sustainable development by requiring development standards above the requirements of the current building regulations and the application of the energy hierarchy.

Require all new development have regard to the energy hierarchy. This is in line with regional policy and will ensure that the need for energy is reduced; energy is used efficiently and will promote the use of renewables/low energy generation. Developments will need to show high standards of energy efficiency, how they have maximised the use of renewables and low carbon energy generation. The energy hierarchy relates not just to energy generation and building materials but encompasses wider issues such as the layout and design of development, passive solar design and will provide comprehensive mechanisms to assess the impact new development and to maximise a reduction in carbon emissions. Residential development accounts for approximately a third of all carbon emissions and therefore promoting low carbon residential development is key to tackling climate change. Requiring the application of the energy hierarchy will promote low carbon residential development. The Government has laid the foundations for the for sustainable housing through both the Code for Sustainable Homes and the step by step increase in the building regulations working towards achieving zero carbon by 2016. The preferred approach for the Core Strategy is to require new residential development to meet a specified level in the code rather than just using a Merton style target for energy generation. The code encompasses a wide range of sustainable issues and therefore takes account of the broader effects of climate as well as just energy use.

Two options are considered. Firstly to require residential development of 5 dwellings or more or more than 16 bedrooms (these thresholds defined in the Peak Sub Region Climate Change Study) to meet the current level in the code or to meet a level in advance of the current requirement. The first option would ensure that development meets not only the building regulation standards relating mainly to energy and water but also development would have to meet the other broader requirement s of the code. Although achieving a code rating is mandatory at present it is possible to get a nil rating and therefore not meet all of the criteria in the code apart from building regulations aspect. The second option would ensure that residential

52 APPENDIX 2

development achieved a high standard of sustainable design in advance of national requirements.

In considering these options it is important to bear in mind that all registered social landlord affordable housing already has to be built to the higher standard of the code and the target for affordable housing is the RSS is 61%. An affordable housing viability assessment has been commissioned which will look at the viability of affordable housing provision and will specifically consider the cost implications of building to the higher level of the code. The results of the study are expected in the New Year. Secondly any requirements relating to the code will have a relatively short shelf life if the Government target of achieving the top level of the code and zero carbon by 2016. For non-residential development the targets for renewable energy given in the Peak Sub Region Climate Change Study will be used to ensure there is a reduction in carbon emissions.

All development will be required to provide an energy statement, which demonstrates that full consideration has been given to the sequential application of the energy hierarchy to achieve a reduction in carbon emissions, and provides details of the expected energy and carbon dioxide savings from the energy efficiency measures and renewables/low carbon energy used.

A DPD regarding low carbon development will be prepared which will look at • Policy for the implementation of a carbon offset fund. • Investigate the potential for a BREEAM rating or similar for non- residential developments.

53 APPENDIX 2

POLICY 17- STAND ALONE ENERGY GENERATION

- Standalone Energy Generation

The Core Strategy should promote the use of renewable/low carbon energy and the development of decentralised energy schemes to reduce carbon emissions.

Stand-alone energy generation encompasses a wide range of different types of energy generation. It would include wind turbines, anaerobic digestion schemes and community or district heating systems which use a central boiler plant or building to supply heat to a dwellings or non residential development.

The Peak Sub region Climate Change Study found there was some potential for wind energy in Core Strategy area, for small scale in High Peak and small and medium scale in Derbyshire Dales. However it stressed the constraints of landscape sensitivity and landscape character. The study also recommended that the future redevelopment proposals in Buxton and Matlock should consider the potential for district heating and all major developments should evaluate combined heat and power systems and opportunities to extend the scheme beyond the site boundary to adjacent areas. The study included a landscape sensitivity assessment that looked at suitability of different landscape types to accommodate renewable energy technology. It looked specifically at bioenergy crops and wind turbine. For anaerobic digestion, biomass, biogas and hydrogen and smallscale hydro it looked at landscape attributes which could be sensitive to renewables and provides generic guidance

The challenge for the Core Strategy is to have policy promotes low carbon development by encouraging the use of renewable/low carbon energy and the development of decentralised energy schemes while ensuring that the high quality of the landscape and historic character of the area is still protected.

The main elements of the policy are:

Proposals for energy generation schemes will be allowed provided that the benefits of the development outweigh any adverse impacts and it can be demonstrated that any harm to the environment or local amenity is minimised or kept to an acceptable level.

In all cases consideration will be given to the impact of proposals on • The environment and local amenity • The appearance of the landscape • Biodiversity • Natural, cultural, historical and archaeological features and areas .

54 APPENDIX 2

Proposal for standalone energy generation schemes in the countryside will be assessed against the criteria in the landscape sensitivity study in the Peak Sub region Climate Change Study.

Decentralised heating schemes will be encouraged. Major developments should evaluate the opportunities for using combined heat and power or district heating schemes and opportunities to extend the scheme beyond the site boundaries .

55 APPENDIX 2

SECTION 5 – A PLEASANT LIVING ENVIRONMENT

POLICY 18 – AFFORDABLE HOUSING

National and Regional Policy

PPS 3: Housing, sets out that local planning authorities can seek the provision of affordable housing through the planning system where there is strong evidence on need.

Local Issues – Evdience Base

To demonstrate the need for affordable housing within the Peak Sub Region both Councils, along with the Peak District National Park Authority commissioned a Joint Housing Needs Survey and a Strategic Housing Market Assessment.

Affordable housing is a key issue in the Core Strategy area due in part to the high cost of houses, and low incomes. Both the Housing Needs Survey and the Housing Market Assessment suggest that there is a need to increase the overall level of affordable housing provision. The Housing Needs Survey indicated a need of between 443 and 591 per annum for new affordable dwellings to meet backlog and emerging needs. Affordable Housing is also recognised as an important issue within the Regional Plan, which sets a target for the delivery of 6,100 affordable homes across the whole of the Peak Sub Region for the period up to 2026. This equates to approximately 61% of the total housing numbers for the whole of the Peak Sub Region.

All agree on the principle of providing affordable homes, but there remains debate as to the best means of ensuring delivery on the ground. In particular there is a clear tension between maximizing affordable targets and ensuring a steady supply of homes are built – primarily through the private sector.

Issues and Options Consultation Response

The Issues and Options Consultation considered this and other matters:

The appropriate percentage of affordable homes Site thresholds Sliding scales The tenure mix.

The response to this consultation was inevitably mixed but a certain degree of concensus did emerge. There was widespread concern that though the Regional Plan target of 6,100 affordable homes reflected the acute level of need, it was not achievable given current conditions and resources. However opinion varied as to the level of affordable housing that was realistic and appropriate.

56 APPENDIX 2

There was a degree of support for a sliding scale approach, but many acknowledged that much needed to be worked out in detail. Equally, in terms of tenure mix, the majority of respondents favoured a lower proportion of housing for rent.

There is no doubt that affordable housing places a significant burden on new development – especially when added to the customary contributions for other services and infrastructure. There has been concern that the current Council policies with their ‘all or nothing’ threshold approach do not share this burden evenly. Unsurprisingly applications are frequently made on numbers just below the minimum that attracts the affordable levy.

The importance of testing the viability of affordable housing policies has been emphasised by the 2008 Court of Appeal Decision on the Blyth Valley Core Strategy. The judgement emphasised the importance of local planning authorities and inspectors adhering to the requirement in PPS3 for affordable housing targets in local development documents to be based on an informed assessment of economic viability. PPS3 advises that affordable housing targets should reflect an assessment of economic viability, taking account of risks to delivery and likely levels of finance, including public subsidy and developer contributions. A similar requirement for an informed assessment relates to thresholds.

Both Councils are now engaged in this economic viability assessment – and this will be critical to informing the final policy recommended for the Core Strategy.

In the meantime, based on the evidence so far, policy could adopt the following approach

Proposed Policy Direction

Potential for a sliding scale of affordable housing with a more even gradient of contributions

Greater emphasis on shared equity, discounted sale and other forms of affordable home – with correspondingly less on social rented housing.

Potential to vary the policy across different areas where the evidence supports this

Potential to review or vary contributions over time according to prevailing market conditions

57 APPENDIX 2

POLICY 19 COMMUNITY SAFETY

National and Regional Policy

The Government identifies that crime, and as importantly the fear of crime are amongst the top concerns for local communities. Guidance outlined in PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Communities and PPS3 Housing recognises that in order to deliver sustainable development, the planning system should promote communities that are inclusive, healthy, safe and crime free whilst at the same time respect the diverse needs of the community.

Local Issues – Evidence Base

The delivery of sustainable communities and the provision of a safe living environment without the fear of crime is a key priority for the Core Strategy to address. The design of buildings and spaces can make a significant contribution towards reducing the opportunities and scope for crime to occur and create more pleasant and reassuring living environments and promote community cohesion. The master planning and design of development will play a crucial role in delivering a reduction in crime, improve safety and minimise the fear of crime across the Core Strategy area. The design and layout of development should obtain good design principles and design out crime in all public areas including housing, town centres and industrial locations. Consideration of standards such as ‘Secured By Design’ should be promoted to encourage developers to adopt crime prevention measures in development schemes from the outset.

Issues and Options Consultation Response

Crime prevention and safety are at the heart of sustainable development. One of the key issues in the Issues and Options consultation document, was the need to improve safety and reduce crime and fear of crime, as this would make a valuable contribution to the health and well being of communities in the Core Strategy Area. All respondents felt that new development should address safety and security issues through appropriate design (Option WB 3a), including the design of buildings, lighting, landscaping, surveillance of open spaces and the siting of pedestrian and vehicular access.

Proposed Policy Direction

It is suggested that the main elements of the policy are:

Design of all developments must take account of the need to reduce the opportunities for crime and the fear of crime and disorder and promote safe living environments.

Development proposals must include and promote good design that creates safer places and deters crime .

58 APPENDIX 2

POLICY 20 – PROVIDING FOR GYPSIES, TRAVELLERS AND TRAVELLING SHOW PEOPLE.

National and Regional Policy

Current Government guidance focuses on increasing site provision for gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople based on an evidenced based understanding of local need. Local authorities are required to undertake Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessments (GTAA) to establish the existing gypsy, traveller and travelling showpeople population and their future requirements for pitches. The Regional Spatial Strategy should take on board the findings of the GTAA and specify pitch numbers for individual local authorities. The Core Strategy should detail a criteria based policy for the location of sites that will be used to guide the allocation of sites in the relevant DPD. Site allocation DPDs must allocate sufficient sites to meet the requirement from the RSS.

Policy 16 of the Regional Spatial Strategy, Regional Priorities for the Provision for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople states local authorities should identify land for additional pitch provision based on clearly evidenced assessments. Local Development Frameworks should make provision for the minimum additional pitch requirements set out in the GTAA taking account of the need arising from future growth beyond 2012. Allowance for the redistribution of provision, where identified in the GTAA, could be enabled by the preparation of joint or coordinated LDFs.

Local Issues – Evidence Base

In Derbyshire a countywide GTAA was completed in 2008. The study looked at the requirements of gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople. The key findings were;

• There are a total of 93 authorised pitches in Derbyshire. There are no authorised pitches in High Peak and Derbyshire County Council records indicate that there has been one unauthorised encampment since 2005. In Derbyshire Dales there are 2 authorised pitches on a private site. Derbyshire County Council records show there have been 12 unauthorised encampments since 2005 but many of these were from the same group at different locations. • The Study looked at pitched requirement for the five years from mid 2007 and found the minimum requirement for Derbyshire was 58 pitches

Local authority GTAA pitch requirement 2007-2012 Amber Valley 1 Bolsover 1 Chesterfield 0 Derby UA 16 Derbyshire Dales 2

59 APPENDIX 2

Erewash 0 High Peak 0 NE Derbyshire 19 Peak Park 0 South Derbyshire 19 Total 58

• Provision should occur predominately in Derby UA, North East Derbyshire and South Derbyshire. However also is a need for lower amounts of site provision in Amber Valley, Bolsover and Derbyshire Dales. There is no pitch requirement in High Peak. • The Study recommended the pitch requirement could be spread across the County with local authorities sharing their pitch requirement but it did not specify details of this. For the south of the County, Amber Valley or Derbyshire Dales are considered as locations for extra site provision and for the north Chesterfield and High Peak. • There will be an on going need for more pitches. If the gypsy and traveller population continues to grow at around 3% per annum then an extra 15 pitches will be required every 5 years.

Further work is needed to update the GTAA to assess pitch requirements beyond 2012 and to consider if it is possible to share pitch requirements between local authorities. This work will need to be done on a County wide basis.

Issues and Options Responses

Issue H3 of the Issues and Options consultation looked at how to address the housing needs of the gypsy and traveller communities and gave two options. Option H 3a was to meet the identified gypsy and traveller need through the identification of suitable sites. Option H 3b was to use a criteria based approach to determine planning applications for gypsy and traveller sites.

There was support for meeting need through identifying suitable sites. All four respondents supported this approach. They felt some provision should be made in High Peak and a plan led approach should ensure that suitable sites are allocated in sustainable locations. There was a more mixed response to using a criteria based approach with two respondents supporting this option considering, two objecting and one observation. Main issues raised were this approach was unacceptable unless used in conjunction with the site allocation option and it would be contrary to government advice and sites should be brought forward in a similar manner to housing allocations but retain a criteria based approach for flexibility.

Proposed Policy Direction

The policy should address the following issues:

60 APPENDIX 2

• There should be no adverse impact on the amenities of nearby residents or other land uses. • The development should not adversely effect the character of the landscape and should where appropriate enhance the landscape character of the area. Consideration will be given to appropriate forms of landscaping and boundary treatment. • The site should be within reasonable travelling distance by foot, cycle or public transport of local facilities such as schools, shops and community facilities. • The site can be served by facilities such as water and sewage disposal. • The site provides a satisfactory level of amenity for its occupants that is comparable to the settled community. • There is sufficient space within the site for operational needs including parking, turning and servicing of vehicles and in the case of travelling showpeople for the storage of equipment. • Consideration should be given to the use of a rural exceptions policy to enable site delivery

61 APPENDIX 2

POLICY 21 COMMUNITY INFRASTRUCTURE

National and Regional Policy

PPS1 states that development plans should contain clear, comprehensive and inclusive access policies, in terms of both location and external physical access. Policies should aim to break down unnecessary barriers and exclusions in a manner that benefits the entire community.

The provision of a range of services and facilities is key to the delivery of sustainable development. Infrastructure can cover a wide spectrum of services and facilities all of which are crucial to the development of sustainable communities.

Community Infrastructure may include for instance schools, health care facilities, public transport, community buildings, places of worship, sport and recreation facilities, recycling facilities, and open space. The provision of appropriate community infrastructure to meet the needs of the community is an essential aspect of improving the quality of life of residents, ensuring that people can access health care, educational establishments, leisure and recreation facilities and community centers, either by walking or cycling, or by using an efficient public transport network.

Physical Infrastructure may include transport and associated infrastructure such as footpaths/cycle/bridleways, water provision and sewage treatment, drainage, flood protection, power generation, waste disposal, and telecommunications. The delivery of supporting physical infrastructure will be crucial to the implementation of the Core Strategy.

One of the key elements of the Joint Core Strategy will be to demonstrate how the overarching vision and objectives and supporting physical and community infrastructure is going to be delivered, by which agency and in what timescales.

The East Midlands Regional plan also requires local authorities to improve progressively the level of service from existing broadband infrastructure, promote the take up and use of ICT by businesses, and the public and voluntary sectors and ensure that ICT provision for new development is considered at the design stage. This is an important aspect of the Core Strategy as it will enable greater levels of home working and will reduce the need to travel, as well as improving conditions for modern businesses to locate in the Core Strategy Area.

Local Issues – Evidence Base

To achieve a coherent and joined up approach to infrastructure planning and delivery, and ensure new and improved infrastructure is provided to support the principles of the Core Strategy discussions are currently ongoing with

62 APPENDIX 2 stakeholders to discuss service planning, capital programmes and the resultant impacts of development at certain locations for infrastructure provision and capacity.

An initial delivery plan workshop was held in June and a series of workshops with key infrastructure stakeholders are to be held in November. Work on this section of the Core Strategy is evolving.

Issues and Options Responses

Community infrastructure includes a diverse range of physical and social elements that were covered predominantly in the Health and Well Being, open space, sport and recreation and Transport and Infrastructure sections of the Issues and Options Consultation.

A series of options were included in the health and well being section but it was observed that these should not be mutually exclusive and a combination of the options would be the most appropriate approach. Support was expressed for improved access to existing community infrastructure facilities (Option WB1a) particularly through enhancements to the green infrastructure network. Respondents also supported the targeting of new community infrastructure facilities in areas with higher levels of health deprivation (Option WB1b). Opportunities for outdoor recreation across the whole of the Core Strategy Area should be promoted by ensuring that all residential development has access to adequate open space and that good quality facilities are provided and maintained.

While the issues and options consultation indicates that improved access to community infrastructure should be a key aim of the plan, it is also recognised that wildlife features should be protected and any negative impact on the landscape and character of the countryside should be avoided.

The needs of an ageing population should be accommodated through the Core Strategy through greater provision of care homes in areas of high demand (Option WB2a.

The main over-riding issue is one of access and whether facilities should be targeted at specific areas or whether the linkages to centralised services should be improved. There is a high level of support for public transport improvements, increased opportunities to walk and cycle, integrated public transport and schemes to reduce congestion within towns to improve the ease with which residents can access key services, (Issue TR1, TR2)

Proposed Policy Direction

The general policy approach will seek enhancement to; protection of existing; and provision or new physical and community infrastructure. Where existing infrastructure is inadequate to meet current/projected needs developers will be required to fund new or improved provision directly related to those needs.

63 APPENDIX 2

The infrastructure needed to service and deliver sustainable communities must be in place or provided in phase with development. Where infrastructure in inadequate, new or improved provision will be required either through on/off site provision or through a financial contribution.

New development within the core strategy area must ensure that existing community facilities are protected, unless it can be demonstrated that they are no longer needed by the community that they serve and that they are not needed for any other community use, or that the provision of community facilities will be improved / enhanced through relocation at another accessible site. Contributions to essential community infrastructure will be sought, where there is a proven need for improved service provision and where it would contribute to the reduction in social and economic deprivation and inequalities between wards and settlements in the Core Strategy area.

64 Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Core Strategy Joint Advisory – 2 November, 2009

This information is available free of charge in electronic, audio, Braille and large print versions, and in other languages on request.

For assistance in understanding or reading this document or specific information about these Minutes

please call Christine Laver on 01629 761300 or e- mail [email protected] DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK JOINT CORE STRATEGY ADVISORY COMMITTEE

Minutes of a Meeting held on Monday, 2 November, 2009 in the Conference Room, Agricultural Business Centre, Bakewell at 6.30pm

PRESENT Councillor Linda Baldry - In the Chair

Albert Catt (DD), David Hoskin (DD) Peter Kay (HP), David Lomax (HP), Mike Ratcliffe (DD), and Jean Wharmby (HP)

Adrian Fisher (Head of Planning & Development Services – HPBC), Hilary Senior (Principal Planning Policy Officer – HPBC), Mike Hase (Planning Policy Manager – DDDC) and Christine Laver (Democratic Services Officer).

6 members of the Public

APOLOGIES Apologies for absence were received from Councillors Tracy Critchlow, Lewis Rose and Geoff Stevens of Derbyshire Dales and Councillors Caitlin Bisknell and Chris Pearson of High Peak.

270/09 – MINUTES It was moved by Councillor Peter Kay, seconded by Councillor Albert Catt and

RESOLVED That the minutes of the meeting of the Derbyshire Dales and High (Unanimously) Peak Joint Core Strategy Advisory Committee, held on 27 July 2009 be approved as a true record.

271/09 – JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY PROPOSED REVISIONS TO TIMETABLE The timetable for preparation of the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy was set out and agreed as part of the respective Local Development Schemes of the two Authorities. The second key milestone in this process was the publication of an Issues and Options Document. The outcome of the consultation on the Issues and Options Document was reported to the meeting of the Committee held in July. As a result of the feedback from the initial consultation and from further advanced Core Strategies it was considered appropriate to undertake further consultation on growth options, even though it was not in the original timetable, and this was concluded on 1 October 2009. 48 Issued 9 November , 2009

Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Core Strategy Joint Advisory – 2 November, 2009

The level of response to the growth options consultation was high, by comparison with similar exercises, and frequently included concerns relating to the availability of the infrastructure necessary to support the identified growth options. There was a requirement to include an Infrastructure Delivery Plan in the final Core Strategy but, given the expressed concerns, Officers felt that the timetable should be adjusted to enable a draft Infrastructure Delivery Plan to be developed to a stage where it could be included in the Draft Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy.

The necessary adjustments to the timetable were detailed in the report and it was noted that they would not affect the planned completion date.

It was moved by Councillor Linda Baldry, seconded by Jean Wharmby and

RESOLVED That the revised timetable, set out in Paragraph 1.7 of the report, be (Unanimously) recommended to Council (Derbyshire Dales) and the Executive (High Peak) for approval.

272/09 – JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY GROWTH OPTIONS CONSULTATION FEEDBACK

The Issues and Options consultation had suggested that the development strategy should focus new development on Market Towns and larger villages. This was taken into account and, combined with the sites and areas suggested by the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment, resulted in the potential locations for growth put forward in the Growth Options Consultation that took place between 27 August and 1 October 2009.

The extent and means of consultation were detailed in the report.

It was reported that more than 1500 responses had been logged to date, many from individuals who had not previously engaged in the process. Work on analysis of the responses was still ongoing and would be reported in full to the next meeting of the Committee. The Committee was provided with some initial information on the response to the proposed development areas.

It was moved by Councillor David Hoskin, seconded by Councillor Albert Catt and

RESOLVED That the report be noted and a detailed analysis of the consultation (Unanimously) responses be presented to the next meeting of the Committee

273/09 – JOINT DERBYSHIRE DALES AND HIGH PEAK CORE STRATEGY – PROPOSED CORE STRATEGY STRUCTURE AND POLICIES

Following the conclusion of the Issues and Options and Growth Options Consultations the next stage in the production of the Strategy was the preparation of a draft. The content of the Core Strategy would be derived from a combination of the evidence base, National Planning Policy, Regional Planning Policy, the abovementioned consultations, comparison with good practice and discussion with the Government Office.

49 Issued 9 November , 2009

Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Core Strategy Joint Advisory – 2 November, 2009

The report proposed a structure for the Strategy, designed to provide a strong link with the Community Strategy and similar to that adopted by other Authorities. In addition Officers had prepared an outline for each of the sections of the Strategy, setting out the national and regional policy context together with the main local issues and a proposed policy approach. In some cases alternative policy approaches were offered.

The Committee considered each of the 21 sections and Officers noted comments for incorporation into the Draft Strategy.

It was moved by Councillor Albert Catt, seconded by Councillor Jean Wharmby and

RESOLVED 1. That the comments of the Committee in respect of the draft (Unanimously) structure for the Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy, as set out in Appendix 1 to the report, and the Policy Directions, as set out in Appendix 2 to the report, be taken into consideration in the preparation of the draft Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy. 2. That a report on the proposed development strategy to be included in the draft Derbyshire Dales and High Peak Joint Core Strategy be presented to the next meeting of the Committee.

PROPOSED DATES FOR FUTURE MEETINGS

10 December 2009 at 6.30pm at Agricultural Business Centre, Bakewell

25 January 2010 at 6.30pm at Agricultural Business Centre, Bakewell

MEETING CLOSED 8.45 PM

CHAIRMAN

50 Issued 9 November , 2009