Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Submission Sustainability Appraisal Report PDF
Preview Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Submission Sustainability Appraisal Report
CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisal Report Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Submission Sustainability Appraisal Report CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport 1 Non-TechnicalSummary 3 2 PurposeofSustainabilityAppraisal 27 3 RelationshiptoStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment 28 4 Methodology 31 5 SummaryofChangesfromPreferredOptions 34 6 Baseline 41 7 PredictingtheEffectsoftheDPD 62 8 EvaluatingtheEffectsoftheDPD 75 9 ProposalsforMonitoring 89 Appendices 1 BaselineData 93 2 AdditionalLiteratureReview 114 3 AppraisalofPolicies 127 4 AppraisaloftheCumulativeEffectsofPolicies 143 5 HabitatsRegulationAssessment 145 CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport Section 1 Non-Technical Summary Overview 1.1 BrecklandCouncilisrequiredtocarryoutaSustainabilityAppraisal(SA)ofitsLocalDevelopmentFramework (LDF). This Non-Technical Summary summarises the Sustainability Appraisal Report which has been produced toaccompanythepreferredCoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesPlanDocument(DPD).Theroleof theSustainabilityAppraisalReportistoprovidethecontextforthepreferredpoliciesandproposalsandtoconsider the positive and negative effects that these may have on the economic, social and environmental conditions of Breckland. WhyundertakeSustainabilityAppraisal? 1.2 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) requires Local Planning Authorities to undertake Sustainability Appraisal of Local Development Frameworks. Briefly, this means that Breckland Council must considerthesocial,economicandenvironmentaleffectsofanyplanbeingproducedforthearea. 1.3 InadditiontothismandatoryrequirementtoundertakeSustainabilityAppraisals,LocalPlanningAuthorities arerequiredunderEuropeanDirective,toundertakeStrategicEnvironmentalAssessment(SEA).Therequirements for SA and SEA are distinct; however the Government expects that it is possible to satisfy the two requirements throughasingleapproach. WhatisSustainability? 1.4 Sustainabilityisoftendefinedas: ‘Developmentwhichmeetstheneedsofthepresentwithoutcompromisingtheabilityoffuturegenerationstomeet theirownneeds’ (1) 1.5 NationalplanningpolicyrequiresthatLocalAuthoritiesshouldconsidertheinter-relationshipsbetweensocial, economic and environmental considerations. Therefore, Local Authorities should seek to support sustainable developmentthroughtheirLocalDevelopmentFrameworks. Methodology 1.6 The Sustainability Appraisal Report for the Breckland Core Strategy and Development Control Policies Development Plan Document (DPD) is split into three documents; The Scoping Report, The Preferred Options Sustainability Appraisal Report (Sustainability Appraisal 2007) and this document the Submission Sustainability AppraisalReport. 1.7 TheScopingReportsetthecontextoftheappraisal. Itreviewedtheplanspoliciesandstrategiesrelevant toBrecklandandtheCoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesdocument. Italsoestablishedthebaseline oftheenvironmental,economicandsocialstateoftheDistrict. FromthebaselinetheScopingReporthighlighted anumberofissueandproblemswhichtheCoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPolicieswouldneedtotackle and take account of. A framework for testing the sustainability of policy options and the plan was developed. ThereviewofliteratureandbaselinehasbeenupdatesinthesubsequentSustainabilityAppraisalReports. 1.8 The Preferred Options Sustainability Appraisal Report (Sustainability Appraisal 2007) accompanied the Preferred Options consultation on the Core Strategy and Development Control Policies. The report tested the sustainabilityofvariouspolicyoptionsandmadeanassessmentoftheeffectsofthepreferredoptionsandalternative 1 WorldCommissiononEnvironmentandDepartment,1987. 3 CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport options. The report also evaluated the effects and proposed mitigation measures. The report was a important devise in the formulation of the preferred options to ensure the preferred strategy and policies were the most appropriateforachievingsustainabledevelopment. 1.9 The Submission Sustainability Appraisal Report (this document) evaluates the changes made to the plan frombetweenthePreferredOptionsandtheProposedsubmissionversionoftheCoreStrategyandDevelopment ControlPolicies. Thereportmakesanassessmentofthesustainabilityoftheproposedplanawhole,takinginto accountthechangesmadesincePreferredOptions. WhataretheKeySustainabilityissuesinBreckland? 1.10 The key sustainability issues in Breckland have been identified through a review of relevant plans and programmes and through the collection and assessment of data relating to social, economic and environmental issues.ThefollowingtableprovidesasummaryofthekeyissuesinBreckland. SustainableDevelopmentTopic IssuesinBreckland Land,WaterandSoilResources Lossofbestandmostversatileagriculturalland TensionsbetweenwaterdemandandsupplyinBreckland Increasedcontaminationofwaterandsoilresources ClimateChangeandAirPollution Developmentincertainareasmaybesubjecttofluvialfloodingandeffects ofClimateChange Reducedairquality IncreaseddependencyonformsoftransportthatcontributetoClimate Change Increasedtrafficcongestion Biodiversity Reductionsinbiodiversityand(semi)naturalhabitats,includinghabitat fragmentation CulturalHeritageandLandscape Lossofhistoricalassets–buildings,archaeologyandlandscapefeatures, throughinsensitivedevelopment. Pressuresonlandscapefromdevelopment Erosionofqualityanddistinctivenessinthebuiltenvironment PopulationandHumanHealth Lossandcontinuedshortfallsofpubliclyaccessibleopenspace Ageingpopulation Pressureplacedonhealthcareinfrastructure HigherincidenceoflimitinglongtermillnessesthantheEastofEngland average InclusiveCommunities Lackofaffordablehousing Deprivationandlow-paideconomy Erosionofruralserviceprovision,contributingtoincreasedruralisolation EconomicActivity Vulnerableandconstrainedeconomy HigherordershoppingcentresoutsidetheDistrictattractshoppersfrom withinBrecklandwhichresultsinaleakageofexpenditureawayfromthe District Table1.1SustainabilityIssuesinBreckland 4 CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport HowweretheStrategyandPoliciesofthePlanAssessedforSustainability 1.11 The strategy and policies were tested against 17 sustainability objectives (and accompanying questions) that have been devised in order to test how the plan will address the sustainability issues in Breckland. The objectivesandaccompanyingquestionsareasfollows: SATopic SustainabilityAppraisalObjective Decisionmaking(Appraisal)questions Land,waterandSoil 1.Minimisetheirreversiblelossof Willituselandthathasbeenpreviously Resources undevelopedlandandproductive developed? agriculturalholdings. Willituselandefficiently? Willitprotectandenhancethebestandmost versatileagriculturalland? 2.LimitwaterconsumptiontothecapacityWillitreducewaterconsumption? ofnaturalprocessesandstorage Willitconservegroundwaterresources? systems. Climatechangeandair3.Reducecontributionstoclimate Willitleadtoanincreasedproportionofenergy pollution change. needsbeingmetfromrenewablesources? Willitreducetheemissionsofgreenhousegases byreducingenergyconsumption? Willitimproveairquality? Willitreducetrafficvolumes? Willitsupporttravelbymeansotherthanthecar? 4.MinimisewasteproductionandsupportWillitreducehouseholdwaste? therecyclingofwaste. Willitincreasewasterecoveryandrecycling? 5.Toavoid,reduceandmanageflood Willitbeatriskofflooding? risk. Willitcontributetoahigherriskelsewhere? Biodiversity 6.Protect,conserve,enhanceand Willitprotect,maintainandenhancesites expandbiodiversity. designatedfortheirnatureconservationinterest? Willitconserveandenhancespecies,diversityand avoidharmtoprotectedspecies? Culturalheritageand 7.Maintain,enhanceandpreservethe Willitmaintainandenhancethedistinctivenessof landscape distinctivenessanddiversityoflandscapelandscapeandtownscapeandcharacter? andtownscapecharacter. Willitmaintainandenhancethecharacterof settlements? Willitprotectandenhanceopenspacesofamenity andrecreationalvalue? 8.Conserveandwhereappropriate Willitprotectorenhancesites,featuresof enhancethehistoricenvironment.* historical,archaeological,orculturalinterest (IncludingConservationAreas,ListedBuildings, RegisteredParksandGardensandScheduled AncientMonuments)? Populationandhuman9.Improvethehealthandwellbeingof Willitreducedeathrates? health thepopulation. Willitimproveaccesstoessentialservicessuch ashealthfacilities? Willitencouragehealthylifestyles,includingtravel choices? 10.Reduceandpreventcrime,and Willitreduceactuallevelsofcrime? reducethefearofcrime. Willitreducefearofcrime? 5 CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport SATopic SustainabilityAppraisalObjective Decisionmaking(Appraisal)questions 11.Improvethequalityandquantityof Willitimproveaccessibilitytoopenspace? accessibleopenspace. Willitimprovethequalityandquantityofaccessible openspace? Inclusivecommunities12.Improvethequality,rangeand Willitimproveaccessibilitytokeylocalservices accessibilityofessentialservicesand andfacilities,includinghealth,education,leisure, facilities. (villageshops,postofficespubs)? Willitimproveaccessibilitytoshoppingfacilities? 13.Redressinequalitiesrelatedtoage, Willitreducepovertyandsocialexclusioninthose gender,disability,race,faith,locationandareasmostaffected? income. Willitimproveaffordabilitytoessentialservices andfacilitiesathome? Willitimproverelationsbetweenpeoplefrom differentbackgroundsandsocialgroup? 14.Ensureallgroupshaveaccessto Willitsupporttherangeofhousingtypesandsizes, affordable,decentandappropriate includingaffordabletomeettheneedsofallsectors housing.* inthecommunity? Willitreducethenumberofunfithomes? Willitreducehousingneed? Willitmeettheneedsofthetravellingcommunity? EconomicActivity 15.Increasethevitalityandviabilityof Willitincreasevitalityofexistingtowncentres? existingtowncentres. Willitincreaseviabilityofexistingtowncentres? 16.HelppeoplegainaccesstosatisfyingWillitsupportandimproveeducation? workappropriatetotheirskills,potential Willitencourageemploymentandreduce andplaceofresidence. employmentoverall? Willitimproveaccesstoemployment/accessto employmentbymeansotherthancar? 17.Improvetheefficiency, Willitimprovebusinessdevelopmentandenhance competitivenessandadaptabilityofthe competitiveness? localeconomy. Willitmakelandandpropertyavailablefor businessdevelopment? Willitsupportsustainabletourism? Willitencourageruraleconomyanddiversification? Table1.2SustainabilityObjectives 1.12 Thefollowingtablesprovideanillustrationof theeffectofthepoliciesoftheplanonthe17sustainability objectives 6 CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport + 17 + + 0 +/ + 0 ? 0 - 0 0 - ? + 0 17 0 0 0 +/+ + +/+ + + + 16 +/ + +/ +/ ? 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 ? + 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 +/+ + + 15 +/ + 0 0 ? 0 + +/ 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 15 ? 0 0 0 0 + + + + 14 + +/ +/ 0 +/ + ? 0 - 0 0 - - + - 14 + 0 + +/+ +/+ ?/- + + 13 ? + +/ +/ ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + ? 13 0 0 0 +/+ + 0 + + + + + 12 +/ +/ +/ 0 +/ + 0 +/ 0 0 0 0 0 + + 12 0 0 0 0 0 - + 11 ? + 0 0 +/ + + 0 0 0 + ? 0 + 0 11 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 + + 9 0 + +/ 0 +/ 0 + 0 0 + 0 0 0 ? 0 9 ? 0 0 0 0 0 + 8 - ? ? ? ? 0 ? 0 0 0 ? +/ ? 0 ? 8 +/+ + 0 0 0 0 + + 7 - ? ? ? ? + + 0 +/ 0 + +/ ? 0 ? 7 +/+ + + 0 ? 0 + + + 6 + ? ? ? 0 0 +/ 0 +/ 0 +/ + ? 0 0 6 + 0 0 0 0 0 + + 5 ? ? ? ? + + ? 0 +/ +/ 0 0 ? 0 0 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 + + 4 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 +/ +/ 0 0 0 0 0 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 + + 3 + + 0 + + 0 ? 0 0 +/ 0 0 +/ 0 ? 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 e v Objecti 2 ? ? 0 ? + + 0 0 +/+ +/+ 0 0 0 0 0 Policies Objective 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 SA 1 - -/- - - ? 0 + + +/+ 0 + + ? 0 - ore SA 1 0 + 0 0 - ? C y 3 Policy SpatialStrateg CP1 CP2 CP3 CP4 CP5 CP6 CP7 CP8 CP9 CP10 CP11 CP12 CP13 CP14 Table1. Policy DC1 DC2 DC3 DC4 DC5 DC6 7 CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport 17 +/+ +/+ 0 ? 0 0 ? ? 0 + 0 0 0 + 0 + ? +/+ 16 +/+ + 0 ? 0 0 0 ? 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 ? +/+ 15 0 0 +/+ 0 0 0 ? 0 0 + 0 0 + + + + 0 - 4 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? ? 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 0 + 0 ? 0 0 0 12 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 +/+ 0 + 0 0 + 1 1 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 0 0 0 0 + + 0 0 0 ? 0 0 + 0 ? 0 0 0 + + + 8 0 ? ? + + + ? ? + +/ +/ +/ 0 0 0 0 + 0 + + 7 ? ? + + + +/ ? ? + +/ + + 0 0 0 0 ? 0 + 6 ? ? 0 + +/ + ? + + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ? 0 + 5 0 0 0 0 + 0 +/ ? ? 0 0 ? 0 0 ? 0 0 0 s e ci 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 oli P ol r 3 ? 0 0 0 + ?/+ 0 + +/+ 0 0 ? + 0 + 0 ? ?/- ont C e nt ctiv 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 me e Obj op SA 1 - ? 0 ? + ? 0 0 ? 0 0 0 ?/- 0 0 0 0 - evel D 4 1. Policy DC7 DC8 DC9 DC10 DC11 DC12 DC13 DC14 DC15 DC16 DC17 DC18 DC19 DC20 DC21 DC22 DC23 DC24 Table 8 CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport WhatAlternativeswereConsidered? 1.13 In the preparation of the preferred options a number of different policies options were developed and assessed against the sustainability objectives. The alternative options to the policies in the Core Strategy and DevelopmentControlPoliciesarelistedbelow. PolicyArea Policy AlternativePoliciesConsidered SpatialStrategy SpatialStrategy Thetfordremainstheprinciplecentreforchange, Derehamispromotedasasecondtiersettlement accommodatingmore,orsimilarlevelsofdevelopment toAttleborough.Lesserdevelopmentisaccommodated intheMarketTownsofSwaffhamandWatton,small scaledevelopmentinServiceCentreVillageswith capacityforexpansionandcomprehensiveprotection ofthecountrysideallowingminimaldevelopmentwhere itspositioninthecountrysideisjustified. Thetfordremainstheprinciplecentreforchange, SwaffhamandWattonaccommodatesimilarlevelsof developmenttoDerehamandAttleborough.Smallscale developmentinServiceCentreVillageswithcapacity forexpansionandthecountrysideiscomprehensively protectedallowingonlyminimaldevelopmentwhereits positioninthecountrysideisjustified. UnplanneddevelopmentoccursacrosstheDistrict;this developmentwillrespondtomarketdemandwhereand whenlocalcircumstancesandinfrastructureallows. CorePolicies CP1Housing Givegreaterprioritytoensuringsufficienthomesare builtoverothersustainabilityfactorssuchasthere-use ofpreviouslydevelopedland.Thisoptionperformswell intermsofmeetingpeople'shousingneedsand ensuringhousinggrowthoccurstosupporteconomic expansioninBreckland. However,theuncertaintyof wheregrowthwilloccurandthedominanceofusing greenfieldlandwillcreatesignificanttensionsaround thelossofagriculturallandandsignificantuncertainties aroundpotentialconflictswithenvironmentalobjectives. Constrainhousinglandsupplytoensurethathardto developbrownfieldsitesarebroughtforwardfirstand onlyreleasegreenfieldsitesbefore2011wherethey wouldhelpdeliverabrownfieldsite.Althoughthisoption wouldhavethepotentialtodecreasetheamountof greenfieldlandthatwouldneedtobereleasedinthe shorttermitwasnotconsideredtoaddressthewider sustainabilityissuesthatneededtobetakeninto accountindeterminingthemostsuitablelocationfor newdevelopment Thealternativetorequiringamixofhousetypeson newresidentialproposalsisthe"donothing"approach whichwouldessentiallyleavethechoiceofhousesize tothemarketandenabledeveloperstobuildnew 9 CoreStrategyandDevelopmentControlPoliciesSubmissionSustainabilityAppraisalReport PolicyArea Policy AlternativePoliciesConsidered homesaccordingly.Suchanapproachperformspoorly inrespectofsustainabilityappraisalasitisunlikelyto helpachieveabalancedhousingmarketforBreckland intermsofthemixofhousingrecommendedinthe StrategicHousingMarketAssessment.Without interventionitisuncertainwhetherthehousingneeds ofsmallerhouseholds(youngpeopleandelderly)will bemetinBreckland,whichwouldcausesignificant tensionaroundtheobjectiveofensuringeveryonehas accesstodecentandaffordablehousing. Considerationwasgiventoalternativepercentagesof affordablehousingprovisionwithinanydevelopment scheme.Thealternativesconsideredwereprovisions of30%(thecurrentpolicyrequirement)and35% (alignmentwiththeRegionalSpatialStrategypolicy). TheStrategicHousingMarketAssessmentindicates thatBreckland’shousingneedwouldjustifythe provisionof45%affordablehousingandtherefore provisionbelowthisthresholdisunlikelytoaddress housingneedinBrecklandandthusperformspoorlyin termsofsustainability. Anoptionof45%affordablehousingperformswellin termsofsustainabilityappraisal,particularlyaround objectivesrelatingtoaccesstodecentandaffordable housing.GiventherecommendationsoftheStrategic HousingMarketAssessmentthata45%provisionwould assistinbalancingthehousingmarketandmeet housingneedinBreckland,thereisevidencethat45% isdifficulttosustainindevelopmentviabilityterms. Considerationwasgiventoanumberofdifferent thresholdsfortheprovisionofaffordablehousing.These includedatieredapproachdependentonthelocation ofthedevelopmentsite;thismayhavebeen15units or0.5hainMarketTownsand3unitsor0.1hainother villages,or25unitsor1hainMarketTowns. Considerationwasalsogiventousingamuchhigher thresholdorrequiringprovisionofaffordablehousing onallsites.ViabilityworkundertakenbyFordhamson behalfofBrecklandCouncilin2007indicatedthat provisionofaffordablehousingonsitesof3unitsor moreor0.1hawasmarginalonlyonruralgreenfield sites. Pursuinganartificialthresholdabovetheviable levelforprovisionwouldhamperthepotentialto addresshousingneedinBreckland.However,a requirementtoprovideaffordablehousingonallsites islikelytorendersomeverysmallsites,below5units, unviableandthereforeitisnotconsideredappropriate torequireprovisionbelowthislevel. CP2TheTravellingCommunity AllowforsiteswhereverGypsiesandTravellerswish tolocate.Thisoptionwillhavetwosignificantbroad effectsintermsofsustainability.Firstly,thelackof 10
Description:The list of books you might like
