LOCAL PLAN TECHNICAL PAPER: RURAL SETTLEMENT ROLE AND FUNCTION STUDY 1 REPLACEMENT MENDIP DISTRICT LOCAL PLAN October 2012 Technical Paper Update Rural Settlement Role & Function Paper 2012 Update This update has been prepared in light of a number of changes that have occurred since the publication of the original Rural Settlement Role and Function Paper. As the paper is based on information regarding facilities and services found in villages across the district these are always going to be subject to changes and it is important that decisions made based on this evidence are informed by the most up to date information. There has also been a change in government policy since the publication of the original technical paper in 2010. The original paper detailed the relevant parts of the Planning Policy Statements and Guidance which together made up national planning policy. The current government have condensed these documents into one – the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The parts of the NPPF that are considered relevant are now detailed below in Section 1: Review of Current and Relevant Policy Changes in facilities and service provision Since the original Rural Settlement Role & Function Technical Paper was published in 2010 there have been a number of changes regarding service provision across the rural area. Somerset County Council undertook a review of their funding of bus services. This resulted in a number of services being reduced however none of the villages listed within the Local Plan Part I as primary or secondary villages have lost the ‘journey to work’ bus service required. In terms of other ‘core facilities’ (primary school, shop meeting a range of daily basic needs and a meeting place such as a pub or village hall) there have been two losses. These are: Binegar/Gurney Slade: The primary school at Binegar has been closed. This means that Binegar/Gurney Slade are no longer classified as a primary village but are now classified as a secondary village. Pilton Pilton village shop has now closed. Pilton was previously classified as a secondary village but the loss of this service means that it will now be classified as open countryside. Introduction The intention of this paper is to provide an analysis of the rural communities across Mendip to understand their roles as places in meeting the needs of the rural population. Rural communities have grown and evolved over time, primarily reflecting the ebbs and flows of industries like agriculture and mining. However, whilst these industries are still important in the context of the rural economy, during the post war period greater affluence and mobility have combined to create a far more diverse role for the countryside, and for local people, opportunities, challenges and conflicts have emerged. This study does not proclaim to fully understand the detailed workings of Mendip’s village communities because they are complex and dynamic places where changing socio-economic profiles mean that views and values vary. Instead the study aims to understand the qualities of villages as places to live, limitations and constraints which exist and opportunities which new development or other investment could unlock to improve quality of life and promote sustainable economic diversification. The study partially compliments the portraits of place which were prepared for each of the Mendip Towns in 2008. Informing sustainable patterns of development through the Local Development Framework is the primary purpose of the study. Difficult as they may be, choices need to be made about the manner in which we continue to manage development in the countryside whilst also ensuring that its intrinsic value as a resource (using any definition) is safeguarded for future generations. LOCAL PLAN TECHNICAL PAPER: RURAL SETTLEMENT ROLE AND FUNCTION STUDY 2 1.0 Review of Current and Relevant Policy 1.1 This section aims to draw out the key messages from a number of key policy documents to inform the reader of the general direction of the broad framework within which the debate about rural development is taking place. 1.2 Until the summer of 2010 Regional Spatial Strategies were intended to establish an overall policy framework for local policy making. The emerging Regional Spatial Strategy for the South West set out a broad spatial strategy to guide Local Development Frameworks on the broad location of new development and established housing targets for each district. The incoming coalition government has moved to abolish RSS and the strategic level guidance it contained. 1.3 Following a complete review of the National Planning Policy Framework, the following sections appear most relevant: Para 17: Core Planning Principles: - v) take account of the different roles and character of different areas, …recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving communities within it - vi) allocations of land should prefer land of lesser environmental value… - viii) promote mixed use developments and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas…. - x) actively manage patterns of growth to make fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling and focus significant development in locations which are or can be made sustainable Para 28: …The transport system needs to be balanced in favour of sustainable transport modes, giving people a real choice about how they travel. Para 30: In preparing Local Plans, local planning authorities should therefore support a pattern of development which, where reasonable to do so, facilitates the use of sustainable modes of transport. Para 37: Planning policies should aim for a balance of land uses within their area so that people can be encouraged to minimise journey lengths for employment, shopping, leisure, education and other activities. Para 152: Local planning authorities should seek opportunities to achieve each of the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development, and net gains across all three. Significant adverse impacts on any of these dimensions should be avoided and, wherever possible, alternative options which reduce or eliminate such impacts should be pursued. Where adverse impacts are unavoidable, measures to mitigate the impact should be considered. Where adequate mitigation measures are not possible, compensatory measures may be appropriate. 1.4 The key messages can be summarised to be: Meeting objectively assessed needs in a manner that is responsive to each place Promoting development in locations with transport choices Improving the balance of uses in a particular place to reduce travel demands Make effective use of previously developed land and otherwise land of lesser environmental quality LOCAL PLAN TECHNICAL PAPER: RURAL SETTLEMENT ROLE AND FUNCTION STUDY 3 1.5 The Taylor Review: A Living Working Countryside is a study commissioned by the previous (Labour) government to review planning policy and the delivery of housing in the countryside. The review’s key message is that current planning policy can easily cause settlements to fall into a ‘sustainability trap’, where development is restricted in locations considered unsustainable, which then causes that settlement to decline and become still less sustainable. There are a number of specific recommendations relevant to Local Development Frameworks: Planning policy should balance all three strands of sustainability – economic, social and environmental rather than giving more weight to environmental sustainability Local planning authorities should work with their local communities to assess how their environmental, social and economic needs can be met through the LDF as it is developed, working towards a clear vision of the future for each settlement built on consultation with the people who live there. Local planning authorities must ensure that affordable housing needs are met. It should be recognised that rural economies have an important contribution to make to regional and national economies and that all types of business and enterprise can be appropriate to rural areas, subject to assessment of impact based on local circumstances and conditions. Development in rural areas should not necessarily be refused simply on the grounds of lack of access by public transport, as this is currently a significant barrier to rural economic development. Decisions on rural employment sites should be based on evidence addressing the supply of employment sites in the local community so that its sustainability is protected and enhanced. Account should be taken of changing spatial working patterns: home-based working and workspace extensions to the home should be supported subject to assessment of local impacts1 Key Issues 1.10 The key issues to draw out of this current policy are: Local Planning Authorities need to ensure that suitable land is available for development in line with economic, social and environmental objectives to improve quality of life. It is important that these three strands of sustainability are balanced when planning for future development in rural areas New development in open countryside must be strictly controlled with exceptions only for those who by nature of their job need to reside in such a location Good quality development should be allowed in villages if it benefits the local community and the local economy Accessibility is a key factor in development decisions All planning documents prepared by Local Planning Authorities need to be in accordance with national policy 2.0 Data Collection 2.1 A number of different types of data have been used in compiling this paper. Initially, a Rural Facilities Survey was sent out to each parish in the district in April 2008. Each parish was asked to complete one survey for each village in the parish. The survey included questions on: the types and levels of services and facilities in villages what social and sports clubs are available what employment offer exists what the community value about their village whether the community are in favour of future development, and if so, what type of development they would like to see 2.2 A response rate of 59% was received accounting for 65 out of 110 villages.