Rotherham MBC Core Strategy June 2014 Report to Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council by Richard E Hollox BA(Hons) BSc(Econ) MPhil FRTPI FRICS an Inspector appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Date 30 June 2014 PLANNING AND COMPULSORY PURCHASE ACT 2004 (AS AMENDED) SECTION 20 REPORT ON THE EXAMINATION INTO THE PUBLICATION ROTHERHAM CORE STRATEGY 2013-2028 (JUNE 2012) LOCAL PLAN Document submitted for Examination 6 June 2013 Examination hearings held between 22 October and 6 November 2013 and on 15 May 2014 File Ref: PINS/P4415/429/5 Rotherham MBC Core Strategy June 2014 GLOSSARY AA Appropriate Assessment AHLV Area of High Landscape Value AMR Annual Monitoring Report AWP Aggregates Working Party CC City Council CIL Community Infrastructure Levy CS Core Strategy DCLG Department of Communities and Local Government DPD Development Plan Document EA Environment Agency FC Focused Change Framework National Planning Policy Framework HIA Heritage Impact Assessment HS2 High Speed 2 IDF Infrastructure Delivery Forum IDG Infrastructure Delivery Group IDS Infrastructure Delivery Schedule IIA Integrated Impact Assessment LAA Local Aggregate Assessment LDS Local Development Scheme LEP Local Enterprise Partnership LNR Local Nature Reserve MBC Metropolitan Borough Council MM Main Modification MoU Memorandum of Understanding MSA Mineral Safeguarding Area ONS Office for National Statistics PDL Previously‐developed (brownfield) land RS Regional Strategy SA Sustainability Appraisal SCI Statement of Community Involvement SCS Sustainable Community Strategy SHLAA Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment SHMA Strategic Housing Market Assessment SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest UDP Unitary Development Plan Rotherham MBC Core Strategy June 2014 Non-Technical Summary This Report concludes that the Rotherham Publication Core Strategy 2013-2028 (June 2012) Local Plan provides an appropriate basis for the planning of the Borough during the next 15 years provided that a number of modifications are made to it. The Council has specifically requested that I recommend any Main Modifications necessary to enable it to adopt the plan. I have recommended their inclusion after considering the representations from other parties on these changes. The Main modifications can be summarised as follows: : • MM1 introduces a new Policy CS34 Housing Delivery and Ongoing Co- operation. This commits the Council to continue to co-operate with relevant bodies to produce as a matter of urgency a SHMA for the entire housing market area, the monitoring of performance in the delivery of housing, possible measures for rectifying any shortfalls (including the review of the Core Strategy) and the circumstances constituting under- performance in the delivery of housing; • MM2 identifies Waverley as a Principal Settlement. As proposed by the Council, it defines Bassingthorpe Farm as a Strategic Allocation as set out in MM7, requires the preparation of a Masterplan to guide its proper development and, like MM8, refers to the already prepared Concept Framework; • MM3 deletes the reference to phasing in Policy CS3 and in other ways better accords it with the Framework; • MM4 encourages the use of renewable, low carbon and decentralised energy and stipulates that all development should achieve, as a minimum, the appropriate carbon compliance targets as defined in the Building Regulations; • MM5 identifies the extent of the housing backlog and distributes it evenly throughout the plan period; • MM6 is a revised housing trajectory taking account of MM5; • MM9 & MM10 set out useful guidance on matters of viability and commit the Council to seek every opportunity to work positively with developers and others to deliver affordable housing and a mix of housing types; • MM11 provides that land will be allocated for new sites for gypsies, travellers and travelling showpeople with options for new allocations considered throughout the whole Borough. • MM12 provides for the relocation of employment uses which are ill- suited to their surroundings whilst protecting existing and potential employment opportunities; • MM13 encourages suitable new uses for vacant, under-used or derelict historic buildings; • MM14 brings the provision of accessible green space into conformity with national policy concerning planning obligations; • MM15 sets out the amended sub-regional apportionment and other most up to date data derived from the Draft Local Aggregate Assessment (LAA); • MM16 ensures that, for transport assessments, current national guidance at the time on thresholds for the type of development proposed Rotherham MBC Core Strategy June 2014 will be taken into account; • MM17 sets up a mechanism to ensure the monitoring and delivery of the strategy and the timely provision of the infrastructure on which it depends; • MM18 draws attention to the provisional route of HS2 and to the Council’s intention to protect it. Introduction 1. This Report contains my assessment of the Rotherham Publication Core Strategy 2013-2028 (June 2012) Local Plan (the Plan) in terms of Section 20(5) of the Planning & Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended). It considers first whether the Plan’s preparation has complied with the duty to co-operate, in recognition that there is no scope to remedy any failure in this regard. It then considers whether the Plan is sound and whether it is compliant with the legal requirements. The National Planning Policy Framework (the Framework) (paragraph 182) makes clear that to be sound, a Local Plan should be positively prepared, justified, effective and consistent with national policy. 2. The starting point for the examination is the assumption that the Council has submitted what it considers to be a sound plan. The basis for my examination is the Rotherham Publication Core Strategy 2013-2028 (June 2012) Local Plan, together with the Core Strategy Focused Changes (January 2013) and the Rotherham Core Strategy Schedule of Additional Proposed Changes (June 2013). Together, these 3 documents comprise the Core Strategy submitted to the Secretary of State for examination. 3. My Report deals with the MMs that are needed to make the Plan sound and legally compliant and they are identified in bold in the Report (MM). In accordance with Section 20 (7C) of the 2004 Act the Council requested in its letter to me of 14 January 2014 that I should make any modifications needed to rectify matters that make the Plan unsound and/or not legally compliant and thus incapable of being adopted. Following and in accordance with my letter to the Council of 6 January 2014 (Document ED/79) in which I set out some preliminary thoughts on the Core Strategy and its Examination, the Council prepared 20 draft MMs which were the subject of public consultation. They, and the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) of them, were discussed at the hearing held on 15 May 2014. 4. In the light of the evidence submitted for and at that hearing, I consider that 2 of those draft MMs should not proceed. They relate to overall housing numbers and to Waverley as a District Centre. Hence there are 18, rather than 20, recommended MMs. They do not entail any substantive amendments amendments to the original set of MMs that would undermine the participatory processes or the SA that underpinned the basis upon which the MMs have been brought forward. In other words, full account has been taken of the representations made upon the 20 draft MMs and the SA. The 18 Rotherham MBC Core Strategy June 2014 recommended MMs are set out in the Appendix to this Report and should be incorporated in the Core Strategy, thereby making it sound. 5. The Council intends to make a number of other, Additional Modifications which, in essence, would provide updating, clarification and minor amendments. They would usefully assist the full understanding of the Core Strategy and its objectives. For the most part they arise from discussions at the hearings and negotiations between the Council and other participants. I do not, however, refer to them in my Report because they do not go to the soundness of the Core Strategy and thus do not make an unsound plan sound. Assessment of Duty to Co-operate 6. Section 20(5)(c) of the 2004 Act requires that I consider whether the Council has complied with any duty imposed on it by Section 33A of the 2004 Act in relation to the Plan’s preparation. This Section imposes a duty on the Council to co-operate in relation to the planning of sustainable development so far as relating to a strategic matter. The Oxford English Dictionary defines co- operate as to work together, act in conjunction with another person or thing, to an end, or in a work. It is therefore more than mere consultation. This definition is a good start. Importantly, however, it does not demand that a consensus be achieved in all circumstances. The Framework explains that strategic matters relate in particular to a number of issues, including the homes and jobs needed for the area, the provision of retail, leisure and other commercial development, infrastructure in its various guises, the mitigation of climate change and the conservation of the natural and historic environment. 7. The Council has prepared a comprehensive Statement of Co-operation and, to assist me further in my task, I wrote to it on 11 July 2013 for its further views on the matter. It was discussed in some detail at the first hearing on 22 October 2013. The Statement sets out the names of the 9 relevant authorities and 9 prescribed bodies with which the Council has co-operated during the preparation of the Core Strategy. It has also co-operated with the Sheffield Region Local Enterprise Partnership (LEP) and the South Yorkshire Nature Partnership. The Statement explains that co-operation at both member and officer level between the Council and, for example, neighbouring authorities is nothing new. It occurred during the preparation and review of the Regional Strategy (RS) for Yorkshire and the Humber and the Yorkshire and Humber Plan which replaced it in 2008.