long stratton 2026 shaping the future development of your town · shaping the future development of...

Long Stratton 2026

Shaping the future development of your town

Long Stratton Area Action Plan Pre-Submission Version July 2014

2

Contents Page No Foreword 1. Introduction 2. Key Characteristics of Long Stratton 3. The Vision and Objectives 4. The Area Covered by the AAP 5. Housing and Delivering a Bypass 6. Employment 7. Town Centre 8. Environment 9. Recreation 10. Accessibility – Walking, Cycling and Public

Transport 11. The Development Boundary 12. Delivering the Plan Appendices Appendix 1 – Joint Core Strategy policy for Long Stratton Appendix 2 - Policies Map Appendix 3 - Green Infrastructure Map Published separately: A Sustainability Appraisal Report for the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

3

Foreword Producing an Area Action Plan (AAP) is the best way to ensure that the housing growth planned for Long Stratton over the next 15 years will be absolutely conditioned to the creation of a bypass, something local people have campaigned for over 70 years. But planning for growth isn’t just about a bypass. It’s also planning for improvements to the village centre including improvements to public transport, new leisure & education facilities and local employment opportunities. Developing a robust Area Action Plan means that we can control growth in housing, employment, services and infrastructure and make sure that they are completed in a co-ordinated way. Controlled development means that Long Stratton can become one of the best places to live in South Norfolk. John Fuller Council Leader

4

1. Introduction Introduction 1.1 Area Action Plans (AAPs) provide the planning framework for places

where significant development is planned and/or conservation needed. South Norfolk Council has prepared an AAP for Long Stratton due to the amount of growth for Long Stratton between 2008 and 2026, as identified in Policy 10 of the Joint Core Strategy (JCS).

1.2 The JCS identifies Long Stratton for growth of at least 1,800 new

dwellings and employment opportunities, and importantly states that the development in Long Stratton is required, amongst other things, to deliver a new bypass for the village. The JCS also refers to the need to enhance the centre of the village, with environmental improvements, traffic management and expanded services, in order to raise the perception of Long Stratton from a large village to a small town. Additionally, the JCS identifies the importance of conserving the ancient landscape to the east of the village within a wider green infrastructure corridor. The JCS does not identify the location of new development as this is identified in this AAP.

1.3 The AAP is not only about allocating new development, but about the

whole settlement. The bypass is designed to benefit the wider community and new infrastructure, expanded facilities and environmental enhancements need to deliver improvements for existing residents and businesses as well as meeting the needs of growth. The Long Stratton AAP designates areas land for housing, employment and green infrastructure in line with the priorities of South Norfolk Council to:

• Improve our quality of life and the environment in which we live in; • Promote a thriving local economy. 1.4 The Council has defined a boundary for the Long Stratton AAP which

extends in to the adjoining parish of Tharston and Hapton. The settlements of Tharston and Hapton are considered to be smaller rural communities their own classification within the JCS and not considered suitable for new housing. Consequently, only the parts of Tharston that are closer to Long Stratton are included in the AAP. The adopted Long Stratton AAP will form part of the Local Plan for South Norfolk and will be used by the Council when making planning decisions about future development in the village.

5

1.5 A Vision for Long Stratton

The Council has listened to the views of the local people in Long Stratton and balanced these against the requirements of the JCS and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) to develop a vision for Long Stratton to 2026, which forms the basis of the policies and proposals in the AAP.

Vision “Long Stratton - a revitalised large village based around its historic linear street pattern and Conservation Area, growing and building on its existing broad range of jobs and services into a thriving small town. The delivery of a bypass will enable a safer and more inviting town centre with increased shops and services and an enhanced Conservation Area.” National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) 1.6 The National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) was published in

March 2012 and replaced a large number of national planning guidance and policy documents. A presumption in favour of sustainable development is at the heart of the NPPF and paragraph 14 states that this ‘should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking’.

1.7 Paragraph 14 also states that local planning authorities should ‘positively

seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area’ and that Local Plans ‘should meet objectively assessed needs…unless any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits….’.

1.8 This AAP must be considered alongside the policies in the NPPF.

Where a particular topic area is covered by the NPPF, these policies have not been repeated in the AAP, unless there are particular local circumstances that the AAP needs to address.

A Sustainable Future – South Norfolk’s Local Plan 1.9 The adopted South Norfolk Local Plan (March 2003) is being replaced

by a new Local Plan. The new Local Plan will provide a ‘blueprint’ for future development and growth in the South Norfolk Council area and seeks to embrace ‘spatial planning’ which addresses the social, environmental and economic needs of our communities now and in the future.

1.10 The Local Plan is made up of a suite of documents which are set out in

the diagram below:

6

The Joint Core Strategy (JCS) 1.11 The JCS was prepared jointly by South Norfolk Council, Norwich City

Council and Broadland District Council, working in partnership with Norfolk County Council. It sets out the long-term vision and strategy for the Greater Norwich area up to 2026. It guides future decisions on where to locate new homes, businesses and leisure facilities but it does not specifically identify any particular sites for development. The Joint Core Strategy was adopted in March 2011, with amendments adopted in January 2014.

1.12 During the Examination in 2013 which led to the adoption of

amendments in January 2014, the GNDP submitted evidence on the validity of the overall housing numbers in the JCS [JCS evidence docs SDJCS 14 and 14.1], taking into account latest available evidence including the Interim Household Projections of April 2013. This evidence demonstrated that the housing growth proposed in the JCS met the full objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in the Plan area in accordance with the requirements of NPPF. The evidence was challenged by various parties, some arguing for lower and some for higher numbers. The Inspector’s overall conclusion on this matter was that “overall the housing totals [in the JCS] and modified Housing Trajectory represent a realistic, balanced, deliverable, justified and soundly based set of figures which would meet the objectively assessed housing needs over the plan period”.

1.13 Although overall housing growth levels proposed in the JCS remain the

same as adopted in March 2011 some amendments were made to the JCS to ensure consistency with the NPPF and particularly to ensure that adequate flexibility exists to promote housing delivery if necessary. JCS

7

Policy 22 requires that if there is a significant shortfall of housing supply affecting the Broadland part of the Norwich Policy Area (NPA) the local councils will produce a short, focussed Local Plan to identify additional locations within the NPA for immediately deliverable housing land to remedy the shortfall. If such a Plan is produced priority will be given to sites in accordance with the settlement hierarchy set out in paragraph 6.2 of the JCS.

1.14 Policy 10 of the JCS identifies locations for major new or expanded communities in the Norwich Policy Area, which includes Long Stratton. The JCS ranks Long Stratton as a Key Service Centre for growth of at least 1,800 new homes. (For the full policy wording of the Long Stratton section of Policy 10 see Appendix 1).

1.15 Employment in Long Stratton is referenced under Policies 9 & 10 of the

JCS which identifies the need for new employment development to serve local needs of major growth locations. These policies also reference the requirement for improvements to the town centre, including traffic management, environmental enhancements and expanded facilities.

1.16 The JCS also contains a range of other policies such as affordable

housing levels (Policy 4), energy and water (Policy 3) and promoting good design (Policy 2). This AAP should be considered alongside the policies in the JCS. Where a particular area is covered by the JCS, these policies have not been repeated in the AAP, unless there are particular local circumstances that the AAP needs to address.

South Norfolk Local Plan Documents Allocating Sites 1.17 In addition to the Long Stratton AAP four other South Norfolk Local Plan

documents allocate sites to implement the requirements of the JCS: The Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document 1.18 The Site Specific Allocations and Policies document (see www.south-

norfolk.gov.uk/ss) provides for development growth across the majority of towns and villages in South Norfolk under the settlement hierarchy in the JCS.

The Wymondham Area Action Plan 1.19 The Wymondham AAP (see http://www.south-

norfolk.gov.uk/planning/5151.asp) provides for development growth of 2,200 new homes in line with Policy 10 of the JCS. A key aim of the Wymondham AAP is to provide for housing, green infrastructure, retail and employment growth as well as education provision.

The Cringleford Neighbourhood Plan 1.20 Cringleford is allocated a minimum of 1,200 dwellings in Policy 10 of the

JCS. The Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan was formally adopted by the Council in 2014 and now forms part of the development plan for South Norfolk.

http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/ss

http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/ss

http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/planning/5151.asp


8

The Gypsy and Traveller Local Plan Document 1.21 Sites for gypsies and travellers are not included in the wider Site Specific

Allocations and Policies and AAP documents. A separate Gypsy and Traveller Local Plan Document (which is in preparation) will allocate land for the development of sites in South Norfolk.

Other South Norfolk Council Planning Documents 1.22 A number of other documents have also been produced, which will

form part of the new South Norfolk Local Plan: Development Management Policies Document 1.23 The Development Management Policies document will set out specific

policies which will be used to determine planning applications (alongside JCS policies) (see www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/dmpolicies).

1.24 Non-specific development management policies such as protection of

employment areas have not been repeated in the Long Stratton AAP. Long Stratton-specific policies such as the town centre boundary are included in the Long Stratton AAP.

1.25 Other designations and constraints e.g. County Wildlife Sites, Sites of

Special Scientific Interest, Hazardous Installations, Strategic Gaps, Special Areas of Conservation, Ancient Monuments, Historic Parks and Gardens, Local Nature Reserves and Neighbouring Authority areas are shown on the Policies Map for both the Long Stratton AAP (where relevant) and the Development Management Policies document.

1.26 The adopted South Norfolk Place-Making Guide (SPD) (see

www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/planning/5287.asp) aims to promote and secure high quality design in new development within the district. It makes clear what the Council expects when deciding planning applications and is applicable to all new development with the exception of alterations and extensions to existing properties and design in the historic environment (listed buildings and conservation areas) which are the subject of separate SPDs currently under preparation. The South Norfolk Place-Making Guide SPD set out a number of design principles based on recognised best practice and explains the key requirements that the Council will take into consideration when assessing proposals for new development.

http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/dmpolicies


9

1.27 The Place-Making Guide expands upon the policies in the JCS, in particular Policy 2 ‘Promoting Good Design’ and is a material consideration in the determination of planning applications.

South Norfolk Sustainable Community Strategy 1.28 Working as part of the South Norfolk Alliance, the Council consulted

with South Norfolk residents to inform the production of the South Norfolk Sustainable Community Strategy – Important Issues Local Action 2008-2018. Eight themes were prioritised as a result of joint consultation events during the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Issues and Options consultation in 2010.

Thriving economy Improving skills and improving aspirations Improving housing Environmental sustainability Stronger communities Safer communities Supporting independence Improving health and well being

1.29 The Joint Core Strategy sets out the spatial portrait and vision for

South Norfolk and contains clear planning objectives which are derived upon the themes in the Sustainable Community Strategy. The Long Stratton Area Action Plan sets out a clear vision and objectives to guide the policies in the document which are in conformity with the Joint Core Strategy and Sustainable Community Strategy. Consideration was also given to the themes in Norfolk County Council’s Strategic Partnership delivery plan (Community Strategy) called ‘Norfolk Ambition’. This has since merged in to the Norfolk Joint Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2013/14.

The Duty to Co-operate 1.30 The Localism Act 2011 introduced the concept of the ‘duty to co-

operate’, which requires bodies involved in planning to work together on issues that are of bigger than local significance (e.g. key development proposals and infrastructure projects). The production of the JCS and continued joint working with Broadland District Council, Norwich City and Norfolk County Councils ably demonstrates co-operation. A separate ‘Duty to Co-operate’ paper has been produced which illustrates the wider work undertaken to fulfil the duty.

Evolution of the Long Stratton AAP 1.31 There have been four formal consultation periods in the evolution of the

Long Stratton AAP, plus a number of other consultation exercises. These have included engaging with local communities, service and infrastructure providers, regulatory bodies, site promoters and other

10

interested parties. For more details about how the Long Stratton AAP has been developed, see the Consultation Statement which has been produced alongside this AAP.

2010 and 2011 Public Consultations 1.32 Prior to beginning detailed work on the Long Stratton AAP, the Council

had already asked general questions about the AAP and individual sites suggested for development in the town as part of the Site Specific Allocations and Policies document. The first public consultation on this document took place between 1 September and 19 November 2010 and a second consultation took place between 29 August and 18 November 2011. Responses received to these consultations were taken into account when preparing the Long Stratton AAP.

Long Stratton 2026 Preparing for an Action Plan 1.33 The Council consulted the people of Long Stratton between 29 August

and 18 November 2011. The aim of the public consultation was to gather people’s views about future development in the town. A leaflet and survey called ‘Long Stratton 2026 preparing for an Action Plan’ were sent to all homes and businesses in the parish of Long Stratton and surrounding parishes. The Council also wrote to a large number of other people including relevant service and utility providers, regulatory and amenity bodies, town and parish councils and other statutory consultees.

Preferred Options Consultation 1.34 The Council used the results of the ‘2010, 2011 and the Long Stratton

2026’ consultation, plus a detailed assessment of sites to develop a Preferred Options consultation document. Consultation on the Preferred Options took place between 20 May and 26 July 2013. Responses received to this consultation have been taken into account when preparing the Pre-Submission Long Stratton AAP.

Sustainability Appraisal and Evidence Base 1.35 A key requirement of ensuring that the plan is robust and appropriate is

that the decisions are based on credible and reliable evidence. Sustainability Appraisal (SA) is the process which has been used to test the economic, social and environmental sustainability of the policies and sites considered as the Long Stratton AAP has developed. All Local Plan documents are required to undertake SA which incorporates the requirements of the EU Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive.

1.36 Sustainable development lies at the heart of the planning system and

SA performs a key role in providing a sound evidence base for the plan and forms an integrated part of the plan preparation process. SA must inform the evaluation of alternatives and should demonstrate that the plan is the most appropriate, given the reasonable alternatives. The SA Report has been published alongside this document and provides

11

details as to how the SA process has informed policy formulation and site selection.

Consideration of Alternatives 1.37 25 sites were put forward by landowners and developers as having

potential for development in Long Stratton. The selection process was informed by a combination of Sustainability Appraisal, public and stakeholder consultation responses, evidence base information and assessments of site suitability, availability and deliverability. All sites suggested for development were considered carefully and recommendations on site selection were approved by South Norfolk’s Cabinet prior to inclusion in the AAP document. Details of sites that have been assessed and rejected (and therefore not allocated) are included in the site assessment tables in the Sustainability Appraisal.

1.38 The Sustainability Appraisal assessed four broad housing options

which considered the distribution of new homes in Long Stratton, three based around a total of 1,800 dwelling and a forth based on 2,400 units. These were assessed alongside three employment options for accommodating up to 12 hectares of employment land. The Sustainability Appraisal also assessed the other proposed policies and proposals against the sustainability objectives to identify any potential effects which may need to be mitigated.

1.39 In addition to the 1,800 new dwellings as identified in the JCS,

applications for totalling 181 new dwellings on other sites within the village have been granted planning permission in advance of the adoption of the Long Stratton AAP. As part of the process of determining the application, it was considered that these homes will be additional development to the 1,800 figure.

Land Allocations - Ownership, Viability and Constraints

1.40 Information received from key stakeholders, infrastructure providers and delivery agents, relating to the deliverability of sites has been particularly important in ensuring that the AAP is robust and deliverable. All landowners/site promoters have confirmed in writing that their land is deliverable and viable for the proposed allocated development uses and associated developer requirements. More detailed viability work has been undertaken by the Council and it shows that the Long Stratton AAP is viable at the whole-plan level, as required by paragraph 177 of the National Planning Policy Framework. The Viability Report is available to view in the Evidence Base.

1.41 Policy 20 of the Joint Core Strategy (Implementation) recognises that

the use of Compulsory Purchase Order (CPO) powers will be exercised where appropriate, stating that (inter alia): ”Local Planning Authorities and the County Council will make use, where necessary, of their legal powers to bring about strategically significant development, including compulsory purchase”. Land being allocated in the AAP is within a number of separate ownerships and agreement between these

12

different landowners will be necessary to successfully deliver the AAP. If it becomes apparent that the delivery of the objectives of the Long Stratton AAP is being delayed or compromised, the Council may exercise its compulsory purchase powers under Section 226(1) of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act (as amended) to bring forward any allocated sites.

Background Evidence Studies and Reports

1.42 A number of background studies and technical reports have been produced to inform the decisions made regarding site allocations and policies within this document. All of these studies are available to view on either the Council’s website (www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/LongStratton) or the GNDP website (www.gndp.org.uk/our-work/joint-core-strategy/) respectively:

• Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (GNDP) • Green Infrastructure Study (GNDP) • Infrastructure Delivery Plan (GNDP) • Open Space, Sport & Recreation Assessment (GNDP) • Employment Land Review (Arup Study) (GNDP) • Site Assessment Tables (South Norfolk Council) • Landscape Character Assessment (South Norfolk Council) • South Norfolk Place-Making Guide SPD (South Norfolk Council) • JCS Topic Papers (GNDP) • Historic Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment 2009

(GNDP) • South Norfolk Council/GNDP Annual Monitoring Reports (South

Norfolk Council) • Habitats Regulations Assessment (South Norfolk Council) • Report of Housing Development Permitted since 2008 base date

to March 2011 (South Norfolk Council) • JCS Annual Monitoring reports (GNDP) • Overall South Norfolk Housing Trajectory and 5-Year Housing

Land Supply paper (South Norfolk Council) • Viability Report (South Norfolk Council) • Education capacity information (South Norfolk Council)

Safeguarding of Minerals and Waste Sites 1.43 South Norfolk has areas of land located on an identified mineral

resource (sand and gravel) on the British Geological Survey (BGS) mineral resources map (2004). Paragraph 143 of the NPPF requires that Local Plans should define Minerals Safeguarding Areas and adopt appropriate policies to ensure that specific mineral resources are not needlessly sterilised by development. The adopted Norfolk Minerals and Waste Core Strategy does this through Policy CS16 (Safeguarding). Policy CS16 is referenced in the Site Allocation Area Policy as having underlying mineral resource in this area.

http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/LongStratton

http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/LongStratton

http://www.gndp.org.uk/our-work/joint-core-strategy/

13

Water Conservation Management 1.44 South Norfolk has had a series of meetings with Anglian Water and the

Environment Agency and agreed a position statement:

‘Over the longer term, providing that development is suitably phased waste water treatment and protecting the environment need not pose a significant obstacle to delivering the 1,800 dwellings proposed for Long Stratton’.

1.45 A single policy is proposed to encompass land to accommodate both housing and main employment growth. To ensure that any constraints are recognised, it will be referenced in the Site Allocation Area Policy to require that:

Site Allocation Policy Area ‘Foul water strategy to be agreed with Anglian Water and the Environment Agency, regarding the nature and timing of capacity improvements and upgrades to the foul water public sewer network and Water Recycling Centre. No more than 1,000 dwellings occupied prior to written agreement with Anglian Water and the Environment Agency regarding solutions to current capacity constraints.

Habitats Regulations Assessment 1.46 To comply with European legislation, a Habitat Regulations

Assessment (HRA) under the Habitats Directive 1994 is mandatory for all relevant development plan documents. This is to ensure that policies and proposals will avoid adverse effects on certain habitats of national and international significance, whether these are already protected by a formal designation or are sites proposed for such protection (candidate sites). The Long Stratton AAP may only be adopted after it has been shown that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the sites concerned.

1.47 An Appropriate Assessment screening report has been undertaken by

Norfolk County Council. It concludes that site proposals within the Site Allocations document, the Wymondham AAP, the Long Stratton AAP and the Cringleford Neighbourhood Plan, either alone or in combination with other growth proposals identified by the JCS, would be unlikely to have an adverse effect upon the integrity of any European site, subject to the delivery of the necessary mitigation as set out in the Appropriate Assessment of the JCS.

Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) 1.48 The Council has worked jointly to prepare a CIL charging schedule for

each of the three GNDP authorities. The charging schedules were examined in October 2012. The residual levy set £50 per m2 in the Outer Area which includes the area covered by this AAP. South Norfolk Council informed land owners and developers of the intention to adopt CIL, which were implements from 1 May 2014. He full charging schedule can be seen in http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/planning/5191.asp



14

2. Key Characteristics of Long Stratton 2.1 Long Stratton is a large village approximately 16km south of Norwich.

The village has a number of core facilities including a high school, library, medical centre and leisure centre, plus a range of other shops, services and community buildings. These have been the focus around which the settlement has seen steady expansion since the 1960s.

History 2.2 Long Stratton has developed from it origins as a street village on the

Norwich to Ipswich Road, a former Roman Road. The earlier parts of the village developed in a linear pattern, with coherent groupings of 16th, 17th and 19th century houses. This forms a long corridor, broadening out as a small market area at The Plain, in the centre of the village. Consequently the core of the village has a concentration of Listed Buildings that reflects the quality of the built environment. Housing and employment growth on either side of the line of the old Roman Road has considerably altered the historic characteristics of the village during the 20th century.

Population 2.3 The number of dwellings in the parishes of Long Stratton, Tharston and

Hapton grew by almost 30% in the 15 years up to 31st March 2012, with the combined population at the 2011 Census being 5,217.

Housing Growth 2.4 To the west of the A140 estate scale development has taken place in

four distinct areas, from the 1960s onwards, extending the village into the adjoining parish of Tharston and Hapton. Recently outline planning permission was granted for up to 120 further dwellings off Chequers Road, Tharston. Large-scale development to the east of the A140 has been limited to the 370-home Churchfields estate, completed in the early 2000’s.

Transport and Access 2.5 The A140 is a former trunk road which provides direct access to

Norwich to the north and Diss and the A14 and Ipswich to the south. However the road is largely single carriageway and suffers from congestion at a number of points. Congestion is probably most pronounced at Long Stratton where bottlenecks in the centre of the village have long been recognised as a problem, leading to the long-running campaign to gain a bypass for the village. The village is served by a regular bus service, although bus priority measures along the A140 are limited.

Economy 2.6 Long Stratton has a wide range of retail and community facilities. The

number of shops and services is already high for a settlement of this

15

size, making it closer in function to a market town than most villages. In 2011 it was estimated that there were 1,900 jobs in Long Stratton1, with significant sub-regional employers, including South Norfolk Council and Saffron Housing Trust, as well as a range of employers at Tharston Industrial Estate. Although the village has a significant rural hinterland, the Long Stratton housing market area has the highest proportion of people in South Norfolk commuting over 10km to get to work and the highest proportion (39%) who work in the Norwich housing market area2. However the 2001 Census also demonstrated that the types of jobs available in Long Stratton attracted a high proportion (30%) of workers from outside the District.

Landscape 2.7 A landscape character assessment of South Norfolk was originally

undertaken in 20013 and reviewed in 20124. The village sits in the Tas Tributary Farmland on the border with the Great Moulton Plateau Farmland landscape character area. The former lies principally to the north and west of the village and the latter to the south and east. In both areas Long Stratton represents one of the largest settlements in an otherwise relatively dispersed pattern of small-scale villages, with the Great Moulton Plateau in particular having an ‘essentially open, unsettled character’ (LUC, 2001)3. In both cases the areas are vulnerable to the impact on the historic settlement pattern from infilling and linear development and sensitive to the introduction of tall elements which would be intrusive to the sense of openness.

2.8 The Historic Landscape Characterisation that was undertaken as part

of the JCS process5 looked at five zones in and around the village. Any development sites will need to take account of the characteristics of the area within which they fall; however, the greatest care will be needed to the east of the village. In terms of the historic settlement along The Street, the potential impact of any new development should be outweighed by the removal of through traffic which has eroded the character through dirt, noise and severance. Indeed, the development which has extended either side of The Street has not, to date, been easily perceivable from the historic core itself, and because The Street is ‘inward-looking and largely contained’ it is unlikely to be affected unless new buildings are taller and out of scale with the existing development. To the east of the village the area retains many features typical of ‘ancient’ countryside (greens with cohesive settlements of timber buildings around them, church/hall complexes and the tracks which link them) plus a rare grid system of lanes which dates back to at

1 Source: Office for National Statistics licensed under the Open Government Licence v.1.0 2 Greater Norwich Housing Market Assessment, September 2007 3 South Norfolk Landscape Assessment – Vol. 2 Landscape Character Areas of the Norwich Policy Area (Land Use Consultants, June 2001) 4 South Norfolk Local Landscape Designations Review - Landscape Character Areas & River Valleys in the Norwich Policy Area (Chris Blandford Associates, September 2012) 5 Historic Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment of the GNGP preferred option growth areas (Norfolk County Council, 2009)

16

least medieval times; although closer to the village there has been a noticeable loss of hedgerow boundaries.

17

3. The Vision and Objectives A Vision for Long Stratton 3.1 The Long Stratton AAP is based around a vision for the town and a set

of objectives to deliver this vision. The vision and objectives have been derived from feedback from the various consultation exercises and the evidence base and balanced against the requirements of the Joint Core Strategy (JCS) and the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF). The vision guides the policies and proposals in the AAP and the document is structured around the objectives, which form a heading to each chapter.

Vision Long Stratton - a revitalised large village based around its historic linear street pattern and Conservation Area, growing and building on its existing broad range of jobs and services into a thriving small town. The delivery of a bypass will enable a safer and more inviting town centre with increased shops and services and an enhanced Conservation Area. Housing Objective A minimum of 1,800 new houses will be built in locations which support the form and function of the village and deliver a bypass. The bypass will be completed before 250 of the new homes are occupied. The new housing will meet the highest standards of design, energy and water efficiency and affordability whilst recognising the need to sustain and improve the distinctive character of Long Stratton and its surroundings. The necessary infrastructure, including social and community facilities, and public open space will be provided to support new development. Good walking and cycling routes will link the new housing to the town centre. Employment Objective Provision will be made to support a mix of local job opportunities and economic growth in Long Stratton including further opportunities for small businesses, and new commercial development relating to the enhanced town centre. Town Centre Objective The town centre will be revitalised following the removal of heavy lorries and other traffic through the delivery of a new bypass. The historic streetscape of the Conservation Area will be enhanced and a safer and more attractive environment will be created with potential to provide a new ‘market place’ to act as a focal point. The improved centre will enable the reuse of vacant buildings be brought back into use and additional retail provision will be made which is well related to the existing centre.

18

Environment Objective New development will respect the local landscape character especially to the east of the existing village. This will also contribute to the surrounding green infrastructure network which will protect and enhance the biodiversity of the area. Within the new development ‘greens and commons’ will be created to provide open space which will replicate the local historic landscape features and help create locally distinctive neighbourhoods. The environment of the town centre will be significantly improved through measures to capture the benefits of the bypass removing through traffic to provide a safe and inviting location, more attractive for shopping and services and to provide an enhanced setting for the heritage assets in the Conservation Area. Recreation Objective The health, wellbeing and quality of life of local residents will be improved and the sense of community that already exists within the village will be maintained and enhanced by protecting existing public open space and providing new recreation and community facilities to support existing and new development. Walking and cycling routes within the new developments will link with existing networks and provide access to both the town centre and surrounding countryside. Accessibility Objective Transport improvements including bus priority routes at the A140/A47 junction and an enhanced route to the city centre will be provided. The use of public transport will be maximised and safe and direct pedestrian and cycle routes will be provided to link existing and new development to town centre and local employment locations in Long Stratton. Bus waiting facilities will be improved.

19

4. THE AREA COVERED BY THE AAP The Boundary of the Area Action Plan 4.1 The boundary of the AAP is shown on the Policies Map in Appendix 2.

It illustrates the area that will be covered by the proposals and policies contained within this document. It has been necessary to define a boundary for the Long Stratton AAP as it includes settlements which are not covered by the policies in the AAP.

4.2 The AAP is focussed on Long Stratton, with the other settlements

around Long Stratton covered by the Site Specific Allocations and Policies document. However, the boundary of the AAP extends to adjoining parish of Tharston and Hapton to accommodate the JCS requirements.

4.3 The housing areas of Long Stratton already extend into Tharston and

planning permission has been granted for up to 120 new dwellings off Chequers Road. In addition, significant elements of Long Stratton’s employment area are also located in Tharston and Hapton parish, including the industrial estate at Chequers Road and Saffron Housing at Swan Lane, as well as the Long Stratton Medical Partnership. The settlements of Tharston and Hapton are considered to be smaller rural communities and have their own classification within the JCS and not considered suitable for new housing in their own right. Consequently, only the parts of Tharston and Hapton that are closer to Long Stratton are included in the AAP.

4.4 Proposing a boundary for the AAP does not change the formal

boundary of Long Stratton Parish in any way, nor do the policies and proposals in this plan necessitate the need for a change to the parish boundaries. Any changes to town or parish boundaries are undertaken through a different process and at present there are no plans to do so for the Long Stratton area.

4.5 The boundary of the Long Stratton AAP is different from the defined

development boundary for the town. Please see Section 11 for more details about the development boundary.

20

5. Housing and Delivering a Bypass

Housing Objective A minimum of 1,800 new houses will be built in locations which support the form and function of the village and deliver a bypass. The bypass will be completed before 250 of the new homes are occupied. The new housing will meet the highest standards of design, energy and water efficiency and affordability whilst recognising the need to sustain and improve the distinctive character of Long Stratton and its surroundings. The necessary infrastructure, including social and community facilities, and public open space will be provided to support new development. Good walking and cycling routes will link the new housing to the town centre. Long Stratton – a Location for Major Growth 5.1 The JCS identifies Long Stratton as a location for major growth. Policy

10 of the JCS states that ‘at least’ 1,800 new houses should be built in Long Stratton up to 2026 which supports the form and function of the village and delivers a bypass.

5.2 New housing will meet the highest standards of design, energy and

water efficiency and affordability, as specified in relevant policies from the JCS. Housing will also need to be delivered in a way that recognises and respects the importance of the historic character and natural environment that surrounds Long Stratton, particularly the Conservation Area, Tas Tributary Farmland, Great Moulton Plateau and ancient countryside. Necessary infrastructure and public open space must be secured through the policy requirements for allocated sites. The Council’s Development Management Policies document contains policies on housing quality, housing need, design principles and parking provision which developers will need to take into account when building new houses in Long Stratton, as elsewhere in the district.

5.3 The Council’s adopted ‘South Norfolk Place Making Guide

Supplementary Planning Document’ aims to promote and secure good quality design in new development across the district and makes it clear what is expected when proposals for new housing are being developed and assessed. The guide expands upon planning policies in the JCS, and in particular Policy 2 ‘Promoting Good Design’. The guide will help to ensure that new housing in Long Stratton recognises and enhances the distinctive character of the town.

A Bypass for Long Stratton 5.4 Housing growth is dependent on the delivery of a bypass. A bypass

had received previous planning approval from Norfolk County Council in 2005 where an eastern route was preferred due to a higher level of public support, cost efficiency and fewer environmental constraints when assessed against the western alternatives. This route has been

21

promoted as a deliverable opportunity by the landowners, whilst no routes to the west have been actively promoted or shown to be deliverable.

5.5 The southern section of the bypass for Long Stratton will use the

eastern corridor permitted in 2005, but the route north has been amended to reduce cost. The main changes are as follows:

The whole route will be single-carriageway, as opposed to the

previously permitted dual carriageway which is likely to replace the bridge at Hall Lane in the previously permitted scheme and will include at least one additional junction to access planned growth;

The proposed corridor will not necessarily require a roundabout at the southern end, leaving the junction type to be determined at the planning application stage;

The route runs slightly further east in order to accommodate sufficient development for housing growth;

The route is approximately 1km shorter, ending south of Church Lane, Stratton St Michael;

The shorter route will not involve a major new roundabout at Hempnall Crossroads (the A140/B1135/B1527 junction), which will be dealt with separately by a simpler roundabout scheme; and

There is no need for an over-bridge at Church Lane (which is likely to have the resultant benefit of lowering the impact on the setting of St Michael’s Church).

5.6 Details of the junction types will be considered through the site

masterplan and planning application(s). 5.7 Whilst improvements to the Hempnall Crossroads are not specifically

mentioned in JCS Policy 10, they are linked to the bypass in the JCS Infrastructure Framework. Over time improvements have been made to the junction within the existing highway, but further growth at Long Stratton will require a roundabout to be implemented. Improvements to Hempnall Crossroads will need to be agreed with Norfolk County Council and delivered early in the phasing of development.

Bypass Delivery 5.8 Development of 1,800 dwellings within Policy LSNG1 will need to

secure delivery of the bypass plus other necessary infrastructure to support growth. Assuming that the bypass will be delivered by the landowner(s)/developer(s), in conjunction with the local authority, direct access from the A140 from multiple locations will be required. It will be essential for development and the bypass to come forward as a single planning application including the comprehensive masterplan required by Policy LSNG1, with the bypass (at least) dealt with in detail.

5.9 Part of the bypass will form essential site access for new dwellings,

employment and commercial development. This part of the road

22

infrastructure would be delivered as an integral element of the early phases of housing delivery, secured through a Section 38 Agreement (S38)6, which is an agreement that ensures public roads which are built as part of a development (rather than off-site) are designed and built to adoptable standards.

5.10 The remainder of the bypass is likely to be local authority led and will

be funded principally using Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) monies. The mechanisms for collecting CIL are set out in the ‘South Norfolk Council CIL Charging Schedule’ and the supporting ‘CIL Background and Context’, which can be viewed on the GNDP website at http://www.gndp.org.uk/our-work/cil/. Other funding sources may also be available, however, including a £60m Greater Norwich City Deal loan fund to deliver infrastructure and the New Anglia LEP’s Growing Places fund. The Greater Norwich Infrastructure Plan, which was published for the first time, in interim form, in June 2014, will help co-ordinate and manage the delivery of strategic infrastructure to support growth across the three districts of South Norfolk, Norwich and Broadland.

5.11 The funding split between the access road element delivered by the

developer (S38) and the additional bypass length delivered by the local authorities is approximately 50/50.

5.12 The Council will continue discussions with landowners and potential

development partners to deliver the objectives of the Long Stratton AAP. However, if it becomes apparent that the delivery of the objectives of the Long Stratton AAP is being delayed or compromised, the Council may exercise its compulsory purchase powers under Section 226(1) of the 1990 Town and Country Planning Act (as amended) to bring forward any allocated sites.

Bypass Phasing and Key Transport Improvements 5.13 Phasing of the bypass and key transport improvements will form part of

the detailed masterplan. It is anticipated that the bypass will be phased from north to south in conjunction with the new housing. Starting development to the north is desired to minimise traffic impacts on the village prior to completion of the bypass.

5.14 The bypass will need to be completed prior to the occupation of the

250th dwelling to address any highway implications as a result of the planned growth. The local authority-led element of the bypass, including the southern connection to the A140, will be procured by the local authorities (South Norfolk Council and Norfolk County Council) and timely delivery agreed with the developers. Improvements to the centre of the village will be phased after the completion of the whole bypass and procured by the authorities. Subject to agreement from the Local Planning Authority, if further viability evidence demonstrates that

6 An agreement under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980

http://www.gndp.org.uk/our-work/cil/

23

that the occupation threshold of 250 dwellings would impinge upon the delivery of the bypass, a variation to this threshold will be considered, providing that this does not compromise the other requirements of the AAP and would not cause unacceptable highways impacts.

5.15 Upon completion of the bypass, the section of road along the current

A140 between the two northernmost and southernmost bypass junctions will no longer be part of the Primary Route network. Any additional accesses directly onto the existing A140 will either need to be between these two junctions or be designed to be part of the junctions themselves.

Green infrastructure 5.16 The Green Infrastructure map at Appendix 3 identifies the green

infrastructure necessary to deliver the requirements of the AAP. The area sits in the Tas Tributary Farmland on the border with the Great Moulton Plateau Farmland landscape character area. This includes a network of public access routes and existing common land, linking across to the long distance Norfolk Trails. These encompass the Conservation Area, numerous County Wildlife Sites, common land and ancient woodland which make an important contribution to the setting to the east of the town. Development will be instrumental in integrating locally characteristic greens, hedgerows, woodlands and ponds in to development east and west of the village.

5.17 Without proper consideration, the proposed bypass could sever public links with the countryside and divide a population of protected species. The growth of Long Stratton may put pressure on local County Wildlife Sites which are used for dog walking and other recreational activities.

5.18 Green infrastructure will need to include opportunities for strategic public links across the bypass to existing rights of way and develop circular walks linking Long Stratton to Norfolk Trails. Green Infrastructure will also be important to maintain migration routes of local wildlife and creating new areas for wildlife including two new commons. These elements are covered in Policy LNGS1 requirements. Additional consideration should be given to the following GI projects, which could be delivered over the longer term through CIL, projects of existing wildlife/conservation bodies or community groups:

Improvements to public access links from Long Stratton to existing common land [LS5];

Securing public access to a public footpath between Wacton Common and Long Stratton [LS6];

Improve the quality of local County Wildlife Sites to mitigate for increased visitor pressure [LS7];

Improvements to public access between Long Stratton and Norfolk Trails and promotion of circular walks to encourage health and wellbeing [within the area of LS8 and LS9].

24

Waste water 5.20 There are potential constraints to development due to the capacity of

local waste water infrastructure at the Long Stratton Water Recycling Centre, where solutions for accommodating more than 1,400 dwellings may be required. As proposed development exceeds 1,400 dwellings, upgrades and/or capacity at the Water Recycling Centre will need to be established which continue to safeguard the Broads SAC/SPA downstream and meet the requirements of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The impact of at least 1,800 new dwellings will need to be considered in combination with permitted growth, supporting services (schools, community buildings etc.) and employment development. Anglian Water and the Environment Agency have advised that, provided appropriate phasing of housing is implemented along with an agreed foul water strategy which considers the phasing, management and monitoring of overall development in Long Stratton, and then this should not pose an obstacle to delivering proposed growth. This approach would ensure that dwellings would not be occupied ahead of improvements in treatment technology capabilities at the Long Stratton Water Recycling Centre and prevent deterioration in waster quality the downstream water course to meet the requirements of the WFD. At the very least developers of allocation LNGS1 will need to reach agreement with Anglian Water and the Environment Agency prior to occupation of the 1,000th dwelling.

Developments which do not contribute towards the JCS 1,800 housing allocation 5.21 These sites do not form part of the 1,800 housing allocation:

50 dwellings and 800m2 of B1 employment, redevelopment of Cygnet House, Swan Lane (application reference 2013/0265).

120 dwellings at Chequers Road, Tharston (application reference 2010/2225).

60 bed care home off Swan Lane, Tharston (application references 2009/1365 & 2011/0655).

11 affordable homes at Fairfield Close (application reference 2011/1916).

Allocation of Land East, South-East and North-West of Long Stratton 5.22 Land to the east and south-east of Long Stratton provides the

opportunity to clearly link and deliver new housing and employment development with the delivery of a bypass. It is well located in terms of access to the town centre and public transport opportunities. The site will be close to existing residential areas and offers the benefit of reducing traffic through the village, particularly for commercial vehicles. Employment units will also benefit from a more prominent/visible position adjacent to the bypass corridor.

5.23 Land to the north-west of Long Stratton is well located in terms of

access to the town centre, public transport, the A140 and key local services. Both housing and employment opportunities will benefit from

25

direct links to education, health and recreation facilities near the town centre. The provision of a link road between the A140 and Swan Lane will provide enhanced benefits to the town centre by removing town centre traffic and reducing turning movements into Swan Lane.

POLICY LNGS1 LAND EAST, SOUTH-EAST AND NORTH-WEST OF LONG STRATTON 140.1 hectares of land is allocated for housing, employment, a bypass and associated infrastructure. This allocation will accommodate at least 1,800 new homes and 9.5 hectares of local employment opportunities as shown on the Policies Map. The Allocation will accommodate approximately 1,200 dwellings and 8 hectares of employment land to the east and south-east of Long Stratton with approximately 600 dwellings and 1.5 hectares of employment land to the north-west of Long Stratton. The developer(s) of the Allocation will be required to ensure the following: Masterplan and Phasing Plan The site must be comprehensively masterplanned as a whole, taking in to account all the requirements of this policy and comply with all of the following:

Before any housing is permitted on this allocation there shall be a phasing and delivery mechanism that will secure the delivery of the bypass agreed the Local Planning and Highway Authority;

Delivery of the bypass (jointly by the developer(s) and local authorities) before the occupation of the 250th new dwelling in Long Stratton, unless clear evidence is provided to demonstrate that the occupation threshold is unviable and a variation to this threshold which meets the other requirements of the AAP and is acceptable in highways terms is agreed by the Local Planning Authority;

Delivery of a bypass within the identified corridor, unless an alternative route which meets the same objectives is agreed in writing with the Local Planning and Highway Authorities;

Link road between the A140 and Swan Lane to be delivered before the completion of the 200th dwelling in the north-west section of the allocation with no direct access to the A140 north of the bypass junction;

A phasing plan which clearly identifies where key infrastructure will be provided in relation to the provision of housing. Phasing must be designed to ensure development minimises disturbance to existing residents.

Employment Opportunities and Economic Growth Employment opportunities and economic growth within use classes B1, B2 and B8 will be supported in the vicinity shown on the Policies Map.

26

Uses associated with, or ancillary to, these use classes may also be acceptable.

Site to be masterplanned as part of the housing allocation to minimise conflict between uses and to give good access to the A140;

Design and landscaping of land to the south-east to consider the approach/gateway to Long Stratton from the south;

To maximise the opportunities for local residents to walk and cycle to work.

Enhanced Facilities

Site to include an element of mixed-tenure Housing with Care; Provision of a serviced site of at least 1.7 hectares for a new two-

form entry primary school and 60 place pre-school (to be provided at no cost to the local authority/ies);

Open Space and Green Infrastructure

Provision of open space and landscaping in addition to requirement for children’s playspace and older children/adult open space to be addressed at the time of any application;

New development must incorporate the following elements of Green Infrastructure as identified on the Green Infrastructure Map in Appendix 3:

o A primary public crossing between Long Stratton and the wider countryside across the proposed bypass [LS1];

o Secondary public crossings for pedestrians from Long Stratton to the countryside across the bypass [LS2];

o A newly created common, primarily for public use as a ‘gateway’ to Long Stratton from the east [LS3];

o A newly created habitat of a common with ponds for protected species with some restricted public access. This will be bisected by the bypass and must have a culvert under the road to avoid dividing a population of protected species [LS4];

Links between the village and the countryside to the east of the bypass corridor will be enhanced for the benefit of public access and to contribute to green infrastructure;

Provision of a significant buffer to the Long Stratton Waste Water Recycling Centre to be utilised for green infrastructure.

Design Principles

Site to be planned in a way that meets the highest standards of design, energy efficiency and affordability, whilst recognising the need to sustain and improve the distinctive character of Long

27

Stratton; Design of development in accordance with the South Norfolk

Place-Making Guide7, to be of a scale and form which respects and enhances the Conservation Area;

Design of the development and green infrastructure provision to the east of the village to respect and reflect the key features identified in the Historic Landscape Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment (Norfolk County Council, 20095);

Existing grid patterns of lanes to the east of Long Stratton will be retained within new developments and beyond.

Transport

Proportionally contribute to the delivery of a roundabout at Hempnall Crossroads early in the development;

Maximise pedestrian and cycle links between land to the east and The Street/Ipswich Road, including utilising routes through Churchfields, Edge’s Lane, Star Lane and Hall Lane;

Investigate and implement pedestrian and cycle links from the north-west via the Cygnet House site and St Michaels Road;

New vehicular link between the town centre and allocation land to the east and strictly limited access from existing roads;

Ensure the form of development maximises the opportunities for efficient and effective public transport services.

Site Conditions and constraints

Foul water strategy to be agreed with Anglian Water and the Environment Agency, regarding the nature and timing of capacity improvements and upgrades to the foul water public sewer network and Water Recycling Centre. No more than 1,000 dwellings occupied prior to written agreement with Anglian Water and the Environment Agency regarding solutions to current capacity constraints;

Any potential risk of surface water flooding must be addressed/mitigated satisfactorily through an appropriate surface water drainage scheme agreed by the Environment Agency.

Safeguarding provisions in the Norfolk Minerals and Waste Core Strategy Policy CS16 relating to investigation/prior extraction of resources will apply.

Developer Contributions

Site to contribute to the delivery of infrastructure and facilities in Long Stratton through S106 (for on-site infrastructure) and the payment of CIL, including public transport enhancements within the village and on the A140 corridor, bus priority at the A140/A47 junction, environmental enhancements to the village centre, to support the development and any necessary social and

7 South Norfolk Place-Making Guide Supplementary Planning Document, September 2012, available at: http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/planning/5287.asp

28

community facilities and public open space.

29

6. Employment

Employment Objective Provision will be made to support a mix of local job opportunities and economic growth in Long Stratton including further opportunities for small businesses, and new commercial development relating to the enhanced town centre. Long Stratton as a self-contained employment location 6.1 The role that Long Stratton plays as a local shopping and service

centre is important to the economy of the village. The village centre already has a good range of shops and services for those living and working in the village, as well as people from a number of smaller surrounding communities. Long Stratton is the forth-largest centre in South Norfolk, with only the larger market towns of Wymondham, Diss and Harleston offering a greater range of shops and services.

6.2 The JCS does not a make a specific requirement in terms of the

amount of employment land needed in Long Stratton, but recognises that new employment opportunities in the village are required for the village to become a sustainable and self- contained village and develop into that befitting a small market town.

6.3 Local evidence notes the need for a greater variety of units to be made

available in the village. This should help retain existing employers and free up space for new businesses. Consequently, whilst relatively few vacant units exist at Tharston Industrial Estate and any vacancies are usually filled quickly, a number of employers using the purpose-built units at Tharston have moved out of Long Stratton in order to find suitable accommodation for expansion. Limited employment sites exist in the surrounding rural communities; therefore, the current limited opportunities combined with scale of the new housing proposed, means the Council is allocating approximately 12 hectares of new employment land. Approximately 9.5 hectares will be allocated within the allocation LSNG1 plus a 2.5 hectare extension to Tharston Industrial Estate.

Allocation of land west of Tharston Industrial Estate 6.4 The site is an extension to the existing Tharston Industrial estate to the

west of the village. The site is located close to the town centre, public transport and the A140 and offers walking and cycling opportunities to existing residential areas including services and facilities to and from the local area.

30

POLICY LNGS2 LAND WEST OF THARSTON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE Land amounting to 2.5 hectares in total is allocated to support local employment opportunities and economic growth within use classes B1, B2 and B8. Uses associated with, or ancillary to, these use classes may also be acceptable. The developer of the site will be required to ensure the following: To maximise the opportunities for walking and cycling between the

employment area, residential areas and local services and facilities; Agreed phasing of employment land in agreement with Anglian Water

regarding the resolution of wastewater management issues (if necessary);

Vehicular access from Salamanca Road and direct from the Stratton Motor Company site;

Retention/diversion of footpath; Appropriate design and landscaping to the open countryside; and To contribute to the delivery of infrastructure, including the bypass

and other transport improvements, through the payment of CIL and/or S106.

6.5 Policies to protect existing employment uses allow for employment

uses on non-allocated sites and promote working from home will be contained in the Council’s Development Management Policies document, so it has not been considered necessary to have bespoke policies in the AAP.

31

7. Town Centre Town Centre Objective The town centre will be revitalised following the removal of heavy lorries and other traffic through the delivery of a new bypass. The historic streetscape of the Conservation Area will be enhanced and a safer and more attractive environment will be created with potential to provide a new ‘market place’ to act as a focal point. The improved centre will enable the reuse of vacant buildings be brought back into use and additional retail provision will be made which is well related to the existing centre. Enhanced Town Centre of Long Stratton 7.1 Long Stratton has a wide range of retail and community facilities and

acts as a service centre for surrounding villages. The number of shops and services is already high for a settlement of this size, making it closer in function to a market town than most villages. However, its close proximity to Norwich and Diss means that many shoppers choose to travel further afield to obtain a wider variety of goods and services and this is likely to have had an impact on the range of shops and businesses in the village centre.

7.2 The 2003 South Norfolk Local Plan defines a Central Business Area for

Long Stratton. It was noted in 2003 that there was concern about the number of retail units proposed for conversion to residential use. Whilst the village has a good range of shops and services, these will need to be expanded and enhanced if the level of self-containment envisaged by the JCS is to be achieved. Given the constraints around the centre of the village, the main opportunities for enhancement will be through the comprehensive redevelopment of a key site(s).

7.3 To help deliver the Town Centre vision of the AAP, it important that the

right types and balance of uses are maintained and delivered. Opportunities for new development in the town centre are relatively limited and therefore competing uses must be carefully balanced. The Council acknowledges that access between the A140 and the sites proposed to the east of the village needs to be improved. The redevelopment of the Stratton Motor Company site, accompanied by a new access between The Street/Ipswich Road and land to the east would be one way to achieve this. The whole Stratton Motor Company site is included in the town centre boundary and as such offers the opportunity to comprehensively redevelop the site for town centre uses and to increase accessibility to housing growth to the east. To ensure that the more industrial elements of the existing business at Stratton Motors (workshops, bodyshops, paint spraying booths etc.) are not lost, these could be relocated adjacent to the company’s existing operations at Tharston Industrial Estate, within the proposed new employment allocation LNGS2. The adjoining office use at Pretoria House is also included within the defined Town Centre.

32

7.4 There are a number of other sites and properties that are currently

vacant, or not in town centre uses that are located within the town centre boundary. These include the fire station/telephone exchange area on Swan Lane and properties which are interspersed within the Town Centre boundary. These offer the opportunity for a more comprehensive redevelopment where existing uses to be relocated within the village, or to one of the new employment allocations to free up sites for uses that would enhance the commercial centre of Long Stratton.

7.5 An important aspect of supporting the town centre will be ensuring new

development provides sufficient visitor parking. Where possible this should be available for wider use to support the town centre as a whole.

Public realm and improved vitality and viability of Long Stratton 7.6 Expanding the town centre needs to take account of the historic core of

the village which includes a concentration of listed buildings and other heritage assets that are important to the character of the Conservation Area. One of the key justifications for the bypass is that it will remove the ‘danger, noise, vibration and dirt caused by the continuous heavy traffic’, which the 2013 Conservation Area Statement highlights as one of the main impacts on the character of the Conservation Area and a barrier to greater use and enjoyment of the village centre. The removal of through traffic will make the town centre a more attractive location for outdoor activities, which could include the creation of a market place within the defined centre. The traditional location for this would have been at The Plain, where The Street widens significantly at its junction with Star Lane. However, alternatives could include sites where there are opportunities for redevelopment, such as Stratton Motor Company on Ipswich Road or the telephone exchange/fire station on Swan Lane.

7.7 Specific enhancements identified within the Conservation Area

Statement (2013) for Long Stratton are as follows:

Post bypass, gateways to the centre of the village could be introduced in order to emphasise the greater priority for pedestrians;

Traffic calming measures including footway widening, carriageway narrowing in the town centre recognised in the Norfolk County Council’s Major Scheme Business Case for the bypass (NCC, 2005);

Provision for cyclists and measures to encourage appropriate speeds through the centre; and

Surface and boundary treatments and planting, that take into account the Conservation Area Statement, would also be beneficial.

7.8 Local authorities would need to procure these improvements in parallel

with the publicly-funded element of the bypass, to be delivered once the bypass is complete.

7.7 It is envisaged that post bypass, reduced traffic on the (current) A140

should enhance the attractiveness of units on the east side of The

33

Street/Ipswich Road and at the northern and southern extremities of the defined town centre, where there is a greater concentration of vacant units and residential properties. As such, it is hoped that with an improved environment the level of vacancies in the village centre will fall and that some businesses could make greater use of outside space to enhance the atmosphere in the village, including broadening the evening economy.

Defining a Town Centre 7.8 For planning purposes, the NPPF considers it important to define the

extent of the town centre area. Defining a boundary will direct town centre uses such as retail, leisure and business to appropriate parts of the town. The identified town centre boundary encloses an area where these town centre uses are concentrated and is illustrated on the Policies Map in Appendix 2.

7.9 The NPPF and other evidence, such as the Portas Review8, recognise

the changing nature of shopping habits and the retail environment. A successful town centre will need a balance between retaining a core shopping element, whilst also providing for a range of uses that attract different people into the centre throughout the day and evening. Whilst there may be scope for a small ‘corner-shop’ element of retail within a major new housing development, the focus in this AAP is on strengthening the role of the existing centre, which will be accessible to a substantial proportion of the population on foot or by bicycle.

7.10 The Town Centre contains a varied mix of uses, which support day,

evening and night time activities. It is important that this mix is maintained and that new proposals positively contribute to the town centre’s vitality and viability. The NPPF states that councils should clearly define the extent of primary and secondary frontages within the town centre boundary and set out policies to make it clear what types of uses will be permitted within these areas. Primary frontages are likely to include a high proportion of retail uses such as food, drinks, clothing and household goods. Secondary frontages provide greater opportunities for a more diverse mix of uses such as restaurants, cinemas and businesses.

7.11 The town centre policy seeks to maintain a healthy mix of town centre

uses. This policy does not allow for the dilution of main town centre uses in core areas which may damage the viability and amenity of the centre. Whilst some temporary flexibility exists within town centres through permitted development rights exercised in 2013 this remains at this point only a temporary position. Policy LNGS3 reflects a long-term approach to town centre management in seeking to maintain the viability and health of the town centre by protecting important frontages for town centre uses and, in primary frontage areas, retail uses only.

8 The Portas Review: An independent review into the future of our high streets (December 2011)

34

7.12 Permitted development rights have also been introduced in 2014 to

allow the conversion of retail units to residential use. For most of Long Stratton town centre this will not apply as these rights do not apply in conservation areas. In addition, the prior notification process such changes of use must go through allows local planning authorities to resist such changes of use where the premises are needed to provide an adequate supply of services (providing there is a reasonable prospect of the building being used). This should allow protection of areas not within conservation areas, such as the retail units to the north of Swan Lane.

POLICY LNGS3 TOWN CENTRE POLICY In the defined Town Centre boundary for Long Stratton as shown on the Policies Map, development proposals for shopping, food and drink and leisure uses (Use Classes A1, A2, A3, A4, A5 and D2 as defined in the Town and Country Planning (Use Classes) Order 1987, as amended) will be encouraged, together with other defined main town centre uses (falling within Classes D1, B1 and appropriate sui generis class). Within the primary shopping area of Long Stratton, changes of use from Use Class A1 (shops) and Class A2 uses which have benefited from a change of use from Class A1 under the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (Amendment and Consequential Provisions) (England) Order 2014 will not be permitted where they would create a concentration of non-A1 uses that will unacceptably harm the future attractiveness and vitality of that part of the centre; and Proposals within the defined town centre that make use of outside space for town centre uses, including creating a market place, will be encouraged. Character of the town centre As part of any proposals opportunities should be sought to enhance the character and appearance of the town centre, taking into account Policy LNGS5 and the 2013 Conservation Area Statement. Car parking: Where proposals involve the creation of additional customer/visitor car parking, opportunities will be sought to maximise the benefit of this parking for the town centre as a whole.

Explanation of the Use Classes referred to in the proposed policy: B1 Business – Offices under B1a may be appropriate in Town Centres A1 Shops – including shops, retail warehouses, hairdressers, undertakers, travel and ticket agencies, post offices, pet shops,

35

sandwich bars, showrooms, domestic hire shops, dry cleaners and funeral directors A2 Financial and professional services – including banks, building societies, estate and employment agencies, professional and financial services and betting offices A3 Restaurants and cafes – For the sale of food and drink for consumption on the premises – restaurants, snack bars and cafes A4 Drinking establishments – Public houses, wine bars or other drinking establishments (but not night clubs) A5 Hot food takeaways – For the sale of hot food for consumption off the premises D1 Non-residential Institutions – including clinics, health centres, crèches, day nurseries, schools, art galleries, museums, libraries and places of worship D2 Assembly and Leisure – including cinemas, music and concert halls, swimming baths, skating rinks and gymnasiums A Sequential Approach to Development 7.11 The NPPF encourages a sequential approach to development when

considering planning applications for main town centre uses outside town centres or allocated sites. The NPPF advocates a ‘town centre first’ approach and states that where possible main town centre uses should be located in town centres, then edge of centre locations and only if suitable sites are not available should out of centre sites be considered.

7.12 The NPPF sets a default threshold of 2,500m2. To ensure that the

scale of any proposed development does not have a significant adverse impact upon function of the town centre of Long Stratton, the Council applies a threshold of 500 m2. This threshold will allow for small scale incremental growth promoting a competitive town centre and helping provide a choice whilst allowing the core retail function to be protected from larger inappropriate development.

POLICY LNGS4 SEQUENTIAL APPRPACH AND IMPACT ASSESSMENT FOR PROVISION IN LONG STRATTON The development of new retail, service, offices and other main town centre uses will be encouraged within the town centre boundary of Long Stratton as defined on the Policies Map. A sequential assessment and impact assessment will be required when considering planning applications for main town centre uses outside the town centre boundary. Preference will be given to accessible sites that are well connected to the town centre for pedestrians. Proposals for main town centre uses of 500m2 (gross) or more will require an assessment of the impact on:

existing, committed and planned public and private investment in

36

a centre within the catchment of the proposal; and town centre vitality and viability, including local consumer

choice and trade in the town centre and wider area; Where it can be demonstrated that no suitable town centre sites are available, preference will be given to main town centre uses on easily accessible sites that are well connected to the town centre for pedestrians. Car parking: Where proposals involve the creation of additional customer/visitor car parking, opportunities will be sought to maximise the benefit of this parking for the town centre as a whole. Where an application fails to satisfy the sequential test or is likely to have a significant adverse impact it should be refused.

37

8. Environment Environment Objective New development will respect the local landscape character especially to the east of the existing village. This will also contribute to the surrounding green infrastructure network which will protect and enhance the biodiversity of the area. Within the new developments ‘greens and commons’ will be created to provide open space which will replicate the local historic landscape features and help create locally distinctive neighbourhoods. The environment of the town centre will be significantly improved through measures to capture the benefits of the bypass removing through traffic to provide a safe and inviting location, more attractive for shopping and services and to provide an enhanced setting for the heritage assets in the Conservation Area. The Town Centre and Conservation Area 8.1 Long Stratton has an attractive and historic town centre. One of the key

characteristics of the village is its linear form based around a north/south transport route that follows the Roman Pye Road. Within the Conservation Area there are some 54 buildings listed as being of special architectural or historic interest. There are also a number of buildings, which, though not listed, are considered to be of townscape significance. Key focal points include the market place at the junction of The Street and Star Lane and the 14th century St Mary’s Church and surrounding churchyard. Throughout the village the majority of buildings are small-scale, two-storey and to avoid dominating the historic core (and existing residential development) the scale, format and design of new proposals will need to respect this characteristic.

8.2 Whilst this linear feature of Long Stratton will continue upon the

completion of the bypass, it will undoubtedly be affected by the potential for stronger east/west routes across the village. Consequently it will be important to emphasise and strengthen the other characteristics which help create Long Stratton’s identity, including the strong degree of enclosure to the main street; the ground floor shops/shop-fronts on either side of the A140 and strong property boundaries to the road frontage. Enhancements to the area will also be supported to the town centre once a bypass is complete, in order to manage traffic speeds and prioritise walking and cycling.

8.3 Deficiencies with more recent developments, including unsympathetic

infill, have contributed to the dilution of the character of the historic core of the village. Further erosion of the key characteristics of Long Stratton’s identity must be avoided. Further advice about preserving and enhancing the character of Long Stratton can be found in the

38

Council’s 2012 Place-Making Guide Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) and the 2013 Conservation Area Statement for Long Stratton.

POLICY LNGS5 PRESERVING AND ENHANCING THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF LONG STRATTON The Council wants to preserve and enhance the historic character of Long Stratton. Development proposals which would have a negative impact on the character of Long Stratton, or cause substantial harm to the significance of heritage assets will not be permitted.

Landscape Character and the Historic Landscape 8.4 The South Norfolk Landscape Assessment (2001) identifies two

landscape types around Long Stratton: Tas Tributary Farmland on the border with the Great Moulton Plateau. This study was reviewed in 2012 and incorporates revised content where applicable. The landscape is predominately Tas Tributary Farmland with Great Moulton Plateau making a significant contribution. These landscape types are variously described as:

“……Open, gently undulating to flat and sloping landscape incised by shallow tributary valleys, the tributary streams of which are not prominent landscape features…Roman Pye Road (A140) is a significant historic feature, visible within the landscape and the reason for Long Stratton’s location…Significant number of surviving greens, cohesive settlements… An extensive network of ancient trackways linking them together…and an extensive network of narrow lanes and byroads (many of which are ancient, within the east of the area)……. A number of Greens and Commons….”

8.5 The Historic Landscape Characterisation Work (2009) highlights the

survival of significant elements of ‘ancient countryside’ to the east of the village. Important features include remaining greens with cohesive settlements of timber framed buildings grouped around them, plus church/hall complexes and an extensive network of ancient trackways linking them. This area is central to development east of Long Stratton and has already lost many of its field boundaries and become noticeably more featureless; however, this does provide the opportunity for new development to reinstate an older pattern of boundaries as part of the green infrastructure of sites.

8.6 Policy 10 of the Joint Core Strategy (JCS) requires the provision of a

Green Infrastructure corridor to reflect and conserve the ancient landscape to the east of the village. This concept has evolved within the Long Stratton AAP and forms an important element to ensure future growth protects and enhances the existing natural and semi-natural features that contribute so much to Long Stratton’s unique character, and that connections and linkages are created between environmental assets.

39

Enhancing the Provision of Green Infrastructure around Long Stratton 8.7 New development will be the interface between the built development

and the wider countryside; as such the identification and implementation of green infrastructure will need to be an integral element of proposals. Integrating the locally characteristic greens, hedgerows, woodlands and ponds into the development to the east of the village and links to the river valleys from development to the north-west will be key considerations.

8.8 In setting environmental policies at a local level, the AAP will therefore

help to deliver JCS Policy 10 as well as the wider aspirations of the GNDP Green Infrastructure Strategy, and the GNDP Green Infrastructure Delivery Plan, which identified Long Stratton as containing core woodland areas. Within this area there a number of key sites including Fritton Common and Tyrells Wood SSSIs, Wood Green and Tyrells Wood/New Plantation County Wildlife Sites, ancient replanted woodland at The Grove and smaller non-designated sites such as Morningthorpe Green. New development will need to identify and contribute to Green Infrastructure which enhances connectivity between these sites.

8.9 It will be essential to link elements of the environment as development

occurs, and the policy requirements for relevant housing and employment sites will help to ensure this Green Infrastructure is delivered, adding to the quality and quantity of green infrastructure available in the area. All future developments in and around Long Stratton will have regard to the enhancement of Green Infrastructure, and will contribute to its provision

8.10 Policies within the Development Management Policies document

protect County Wildlife Sites from development. Elsewhere in the AAP document, the allocations for development have specific policies which will address green infrastructure issues particular to those sites. The following policy is designed to provide general green infrastructure principles for any additional developments that come forward during the AAP period, including on sites which currently have planning permission and do not have particular policies in the AAP, should those permissions lapse.

40

8.11 The green infrastructure map at Appendix 3 identifies the necessary

green infrastructure requirements for new developments and covers a wider area than the AAP.

POLICY LNGS6 GENERAL GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN LONG STRATTON AAP AREA

New development in Long Stratton will be required to maintain, protect and enhance green infrastructure, and developers will be expected to contribute towards green infrastructure enhancements through CIL and/or s106 contributions.

New developments will be required to provide ecological links to the nearest green infrastructure and consider mitigating for any barriers such as new roads.

In particular it will be important for new development to consider the following:

improved public access to the countryside; improved habitat connectivity; retention of habitat features and creation of new habitats; improved recreational provision to alleviate visitor pressure on

sensitive areas. All new developments should aspire to net biodiversity gain and any planning proposals should be accompanied by detailed ecological assessment. The cumulative impact of developments on biodiversity assets should be considered.

41

9. Recreation Recreation Objective The health, wellbeing and quality of life of local residents will be improved and the sense of community that already exists within the village will be maintained and enhanced by protecting existing public open space and providing new recreation and community facilities to support existing and new development. Walking and cycling routes within the new development will link with existing networks and provide access to both the town centre and surrounding countryside. Improving the Health, Well-being and Quality of Life of People Living in Long Stratton 9.1 One of the key objectives of the JCS is to encourage healthy and active

lifestyles by improving the accessibility of open space and the countryside and providing more sport and recreation facilities. New developments will be expected to incorporate and/or contribute towards new open space and the JCS also seeks to provide for a range of other activities, including formal recreation, country parks and access to the wider countryside.

Current Recreation Provision in Long Stratton 9.2 In 2007 South Norfolk Council appointed a company called Strategic

Leisure to undertake an assessment of open space, sport and recreation facilities across the whole district to identify local needs and opportunities for improving or replacing current facilities. This work resulted in the publication of a document called the South Norfolk Council – PPG17 Open Spaces, Indoor Sports and Community Recreation Assessment (Strategic Leisure September 2007). The study included an audit of all existing indoor and outdoor open space, sport and recreational facilities in terms of quantity, quality and accessibility, including Long Stratton

9.3 The table below shows the recreation provision in Long Stratton as at

2007 compared against the recommended standards. It shows that there is a shortage in the quantity of all types of open space in the town, but recognises that the main provision at the playing fields at Manor Road, was of a high quality. In addition, Long Stratton has a Multi-Use Games Area (MUGA) which allows for more intensive use than an equivalent grassed surface, as well as the indoor facilities at Long Stratton Leisure Centre. Overall, open space provision is not as extensive as the assessment recommends, but the loss of open space or recreation facilities should be avoided.

Open Space type Recommended

Standard (2007) Provision in Long Stratton (2007)

Formal Open Space (formal parks, areas for

0.98ha/1,000 population.

0.89ha/1,000 population

42

community events and areas for sports/recreation – other than formal pitches)

46% quality rating.

Long Stratton Playing Fields - 74%

Formal sports (pitches, courts etc.)

1.82ha/1,000 population 60% quality rating

0.82ha/1,000 population Long Stratton Playing Fields - 90%

Children’s and Young People’s play (equipped areas, skate parks etc.)


1.31ha/1,000 population Long Stratton Playing Fields - 75%

Amenity space (informal open space)


0.40ha/1,000 population No sites rated

Natural/Semi-natural green space (woodlands, commons, wildlife areas)


1.11ha/1,000 population No sites rated

Allotments

0.11ha/1000 population 0.10ha/1,000 population

60% quality rating No sites rated Figures taken from ‘South Norfolk PPG17 Open spaces, Indoor Sports and Community Recreation Assessment (Strategic Leisure Limited, September 2007) Red text indicates a shortfall in provision, blue text indicates an over-provision

Protecting Existing Public Open Space 9.4 The 2007 study by Strategic Leisure shows that there is a deficiency in

all types of open space in Long Stratton. The AAP seeks to protect existing recreation or amenity land within the town from development to prevent this deficiency from becoming worse and to maintain the quality of life of local residents. Existing recreational areas in the town will be incorporated into the creation of green infrastructure networks referred to provide a range of types of open space and ‘destinations’ for local residents, which will help to alleviate pressure on more environmentally sensitive spaces around Long Stratton.

POLICY LNGS7 PROTECTING EXISTING RECREATION OR AMENITY LAND IN LONG STRATTON Existing recreation or amenity land within the town (as shown on the Policies Map) will be protected and enhanced and the change of use or redevelopment of this land will only be permitted where:

the proposed development is ancillary to the principal recreational use of the site;

it affects only a small part of the site and does not prejudice the recreational use of the site;

it involves the replacement of the recreational facility with another of equivalent or improved quality;

an assessment of need shows that there is an excess of provision

43

of the particular facility and it cannot be adapted to meet other recreational needs;

it is part of the relocation of a sports (or similar) club which will provide an overall improvement in recreational facilities;

it will result in recreational provisions better suited to future needs and there is no current shortage of playing fields or recreational/amenity land in the locality

New Recreation Provision

9.5 It is important to ensure that additional public open space and formal recreation facilities are provided for the requirements of the new houses that will be built in Long Stratton up to 2026 to encourage healthy and active lifestyles and improve the quality of life of existing and future residents.

9.6 South Norfolk Council currently uses open space standards as set out in

the ‘Recreational Open Space Requirements for Residential Areas’ document published in December 1994 to calculate open space requirements for new developments. It is expected that both formal and recreational opportunities will be provided as part of new development.

9.8 Using the Council’s 1994 standards it has been calculated that the

allocation of 1,800 houses to the south, south-east and north-west of Long Stratton would need to provide up to 3 hectares of children’s play space and 7.4 hectares of older children/adult open space. It is proposed that this requirement should be accommodated on site but there is an acceptance that due to the high quantum of open space provision required, a degree of flexibility will be accepted within the overall masterplan area due to the multipurpose use of existing formal open space provision at the MUGA and the indoor facilities at Long Stratton Leisure Centre. Additionally, the provision of green infrastructure including woodlands and commons will provide additional informal recreation open space areas which will contribute to the overall open space provision required for Long Stratton.

POLICY LNGS8 NEW RECREATION PROVISION IN LONG STRATTON The Council will require developers to provide new on-site public open space as part of the allocation LNGS1 in Long Stratton using the Council’s 1994 recreational open space standards. New development must provide green infrastructure to help create a network for safe movement around the urban environment of Long Stratton and for non-vehicular access to the surrounding countryside, to strengthen informal recreation.

Improving informal recreation and public access to the countryside 9.9 The PPG 17 Study highlighted a significant shortfall in access to

natural/semi natural open space in Long Stratton. It is not proposed to

44

formally allocate a site for informal recreation in the AAP but the proposals for the links between the village and the countryside to the east of the bypass and beyond through the provision of green infrastructure should enable greater access to the countryside around Long Stratton.

9.10 Policies in Section 8: Environment and Section 9: Recreation contain

proposals aimed at improving green infrastructure and recreation. New development would be the interface between the build development and the wider countryside, as such green infrastructure will be integral to development proposals to enhance and develop walking and cycling opportunities and make links to long distance walking trails to connect the town to the wider countryside. New recreational areas, including woodland and commons, and access will be explored to the east of Long Stratton with the aim of relieving visitor pressure on sensitive sites such as Wood Green and Tyrells Wood County Wildlife Site.

Burial ground

9.12 Based on current burial rates, Long Stratton Parish Council has indicated that there is only available space in the current cemetery to last between 10-15 years. There are currently no proposed sites but any land would need to be near enough to the town centre to enable easy access for residents and would need to meet strict criteria laid down by the Environment Agency. The Environment Agency should be consulted at the earliest opportunity on any potential planning application so the significance of any potential impacts can be explored.

POLICY LNGS9 LAND FOR A NEW BURIAL GROUND IN LONG STRATTON Proposals for a new burial ground either inside or outside the development boundary in Long Stratton will be permitted provided that:

it is in keeping with the character of the surrounding area; it does not have an adverse impact on the amenity of local

residents; it is appropriately located in relation to public transport; it has adequate vehicular access including parking arrangements

for disabled users; there will be no significant impact on controlled waters

(groundwater or surface water); there will be no significant impact on the ecological value of the

area; and there will be no significant impact on nationally important heritage

assets and any impact on lesser significant assets is significantly lessened.

45

10. Accessibility – Walking, Cycling and Public

Transport Accessibility Objective Transport improvements including bus priority routes at the A140/A47 junction and an enhanced route to the city centre will be provided. The use of public transport will be maximised and safe and direct pedestrian and cycle routes will be provided to link existing and new development to town centre and local employment locations in Long Stratton. Bus waiting facilities will be improved.

Walking and cycling 10.1 Long Stratton is a relatively compact settlement, with a concentration of

shops and commercial facilities along The Street and Ipswich Road and community facilities and employment along Swan Lane and Chequers Road. The volume through traffic along the A140 is a considerable barrier to people walking and cycling for everyday activities including poor permeability in to the centre of the village. The JCS encourages safe and direct cycle and pedestrian routes linking existing and new development to town centre and local employment locations in Long Stratton. To facilitate the provision of such routes developers will be expected to provide improved walking and cycling links as part of the masterplan (see Section 5: Housing and Section 6: Employment). Post bypass, additional measures will be undertaken to improve the environment of Long Stratton town centre. This will be achieved by implementing footway widening, cycle facilities and speed reduction measures to make it a better place to walk and cycle.

Bus travel

10.2 The JCS states that bus priority measures will be improved at the A140/A47 Harford junction and the route into the centre of Norwich. The Council will seek to increase service frequency at peak times, as well as enhancements to evening and weekend services. Improved bus services will strengthen links to other villages, providing access to the employment and facilities in Long Stratton that support the nearby settlements, such as the high school, health centre, leisure centre and library. The quality of the waiting environment will also be improved to increase bus usage. The Long Stratton/Norwich Road improvements at the A140/A47 will be delivered by Norfolk County Council and delivered through developer contributions.

10.3 The main improvements to enable enhancements to the bus service

and encourage greater use are:

Higher quality waiting facilities in Long Stratton, including shelters and seating;

Provision of real-time information at bus stops;

46

Bus priority measures along the route, specifically at the A140/A47 Harford junction;

Enhanced route arrangements within Norwich; and Improved waiting facilities and real-time information at key locations

along the route between Diss and Norwich, including Tasburgh, Newton Flotman and Swainsthorpe.

Reducing the need to travel

10.4 Whilst it is important that development contributes to and maximises the opportunities for people to use sustainable travel options (walking, cycling, bus travel) and reduce their dependence on the car, where possible development should also reduce the need to travel. Reduction in journey lengths can be achieved by focussing development around the range of facilities in Long Stratton and through the careful location of new facilities. A reduction in travel can also be achieved by supporting proposals for working from home and ensuring modern telecommunications infrastructure (particularly high-speed broadband) is available to serve new and existing developments.

10.5 Additional policies concerning accessibility, ensuring traffic safety and

parking provision are also contained in the emerging Development Management Policies document: http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/dmpolicies

POLICY LNGS10 ACCESSIBILITY Development will be required to maximise the permeability for pedestrians and cyclists, by improving access to/from existing and new key services and facilities, such as the town centre, schools, medical facilities, leisure facilities/open spaces, employment opportunities, as well as to the wider countryside. Where appropriate, the layout of new development will allow for easy bus circulation, maximising the number of people who are able to walk to/from bus routes. Improved accessibility will be achieved through the following measures: removal of through traffic, including improvements to the provision

for buses (such as a high quality waiting environment and real-time service information), footway widening, carriageway narrowing and speed reduction measures;

bus priority measures on the A140, including at the A140/A47 Harford junction and on the route to the city centre; and

comprehensive and effective broadband/telecommunications network to support commercial, employment and domestic needs.

To ensure accessibility improvements, it must be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Highway Authority and Highways Agency that no



47

detrimental effect will occur to the operation and safety of the A47 trunk road and slip road as a result of the implementation of bus priority measures at the A140/A47 junction.

48

11. Development Boundary

What is a Development Boundary? 11.1 Development boundaries are drawn around settlements considered

suitable for development in the JCS and indicate the Council’s preferred areas for development. Under normal circumstances new development e.g. housing, employment, shopping and tourism proposals, will be acceptable within the defined development boundary, subject to other planning policies concerning those specific uses and considerations such as design, access and servicing. Outside the development boundary policies are more restrictive and proposals will be assessed against relevant policies in JCS and the 2003 South Norfolk Local Plan (SNLP). The 2003 SNLP will be replaced, when they are adopted, by the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, Development Management Policies DPD, Wymondham AAP and this Long Stratton AAP.

The proposed Development Boundary for Long Stratton

11.2.1 The development boundary for Long Stratton is shown on the Policies Map and has been drawn to encompass the land allocations referred to in this AAP, as well as sites with planning permission for housing as referred to in Section 5: Housing. The development boundary has also been drawn to include the schools and other community and employment buildings on Manor Road and Swan Lane (including the medical centre and care home); the 120 dwellings permitted at Chequers Road and existing housing in the east side of Chequers Road.

LNGS11 LONG STRATTON DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY The Council will be supportive of development proposals in Long Stratton that are located on sites within the development boundary for the town as defined on the Proposals Map. Planning permission for proposals outside the defined Development Boundary will only be granted if they satisfy specific criteria in the Council’s Development Management Policies document and the Long Stratton Area Action Plan.

49

12. Delivering the Plan

Implementing the proposals in the AAP 12.1 It is important to consider how the proposals in the AAP will be

delivered. A key concern is to ensure that the proposed development is accompanied by the necessary infrastructure, services and facilities and that these are delivered in a timely manner. The JCS states that a co-ordinated approach will be taken to the timely provision and ongoing maintenance of infrastructure to support development and it contains a detailed policy which describes how this will be undertaken. There is also be a policy about the requirement for adequate infrastructure in the Council’s emerging Development Management Policies document (DM1.2).

12.2 Essential infrastructure that will need to be provided to ensure

sustainable developments in Long Stratton will include: A bypass; Other appropriate transport infrastructure including a roundabout at

Hempnall Crossroads and improved public transport; Affordable or supported housing; Social infrastructure including education, healthcare, police and

emergency services and community facilities; Local and renewable energy generation; Water conservation measures; Improvements to the wastewater network capacity and treatment

facilities; Sustainable drainage systems (SuDS); Open space and green infrastructure including habitat creation and

linkages, pedestrian and cycle links, recreation facilities, trees, hedgerows, woodland and landscaping;

Utilities, including waste management and recycling; Street furniture; and Public art.

13.3 The provision of infrastructure, services and facilities in Long Stratton

will be delivered through a number of different mechanisms, including: Community Infrastructure Levy - Contributions towards strategic

infrastructure from all residential and commercial development made through the introduction of an area-wide Community Infrastructure Levy or CIL. For more information about the CIL please visit http://www.gndp.org.uk/our-work/cil/

Section 106 contributions - Until the CIL is introduced developers will contribute towards the provision of infrastructure through Section 106 agreement. Even when the CIL is introduced Section 106 contributions will continue to be sought for site specific needs.

Maximising mainstream Government funding sources and other funding mechanisms - Including the Homes and

http://www.gndp.org.uk/our-work/cil/

50

Communities Agency, Local Transport Plan, Growth Point Fund, New Homes Bonus and Tax Increment Financing (TIF), City Deals.

Co-ordination with investment programmes of other public bodies e.g. National Health Service.

Capital investment by utilities companies through their asset management plans to their regulator which identify the capital investment required - e.g. Anglian Water, utilities companies.

13.4 The proposals in Long Stratton are dependent upon significant

infrastructure investment. The planned new development will contribute towards this but the provision of infrastructure will need the active co-operation of and investment by other agencies, including utility companies, healthcare providers and central and local government.

13.5 The Greater Norwich Infrastructure Plan (GNIP) helps co-ordinate and

manage the delivery of strategic infrastructure to support growth across the three districts of South Norfolk, Norwich and Broadland. The first, interim, GNIP was published in June 2014, but it will be updated regularly as a ‘living’ document.

Monitoring and review

13.6 Once it is finalised the Long Stratton AAP will be subject to regular monitoring and review to ensure that the policies in the plan are working as intended.

Monitoring and Implementation Framework Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies GENERAL INDICATORS AND TARGETS FOR ALLOCATED SITES LNGS1 LNGS2

Sites allocated in the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

Development meets the highest standards of design, energy efficiency and affordability whilst recognising the need to sustain and improve the distinctive character of Long Stratton

Development meets policy targets set in the JCS for design, energy efficiency and affordable housing

Development accords with standards set out in the Councils Place Making Guide

South Norfolk Council Private Sector Developers Housing Associations Norfolk County Council

New development contributes to the delivery of infrastructure and facilities in Long Stratton through S106 or payment of CIL (where appropriate)

Development has signed S106 agreement or pays CIL (as appropriate)

Satisfactory wastewater infrastructure capacity resolved as appropriate

Water issues agreed through planning application (as appropriate)

Provision of open space (for housing developments) that meets the Council’s published standards

Children’s play space provided in accordance with Council’s 1994 published standards

Older children/adult open space agreed through planning application in accordance with the Council’s 1994 published standards

Surface water flooding resolved as appropriate

Water surface drainage scheme agreed through

52

Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies planning application

SPECIFIC INDICATORS AND TARGETS FOR ALLOCATED SITES LNGS1 Allocation of land at

east, south east and north west of Long Stratton for housing and bypass.

Allocation of 1,800 dwellings and bypass

Take up of housing allocation in line with proposals in the AAP

South Norfolk Council Private Sector Developers Housing Associations Norfolk County Council

Provision of a masterplan for the site Masterplan to be agreed by the Local Authority.

Bypass phasing and housing delivery Appropriate bypass phasing and delivery to be agreed by the Local Authority and Highways Authority.

Provision of mixed tenure housing with care as part of development

The provision of a care home agreed through planning application, secured through legal agreement

Provision of new on-site primary school as part of the development

The provision of a new on-site primary school secured through legal agreement

Provision of a primary and secondary public crossing between Long Stratton and the wider countryside across the proposed bypass

Design of green infrastructure to be agreed with Local Authority and secured through planning condition

Provision of a new common to the east for public use

Design of green infrastructure to be agreed with Local Authority and secured through planning condition

Provision of new habitat with ponds for protected species

Design of green infrastructure to be agreed with Local Authority and

53

Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies secured through planning condition

Design of development and green infrastructure to reflect key the Historic Landscape Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment allowing for grid patterns to be retained and links between the village and the countryside.

Appropriate design of development agreed by the Local Authority.

Buffer to the Long Stratton waste water Recycling Centre to be used for Green Infrastructure

Design of Green Infrastructure to be agreed by Local Authority and secured by legal agreement/planning permission

Improvements to Hempnall crossroads Appropriate highways improvements to be agreed by the Local Authority and Highways Authority.

Improved pedestrian and cycle links to The Street/Ipswich Road, including routes through Churchfields, Edge’s Lane, Star Lane and Hall Lane

Suitable pedestrian and cycle links secured through a legal agreement

New vehicular link with the town centre from the east

Suitable vehicular access arrangements secured through a legal agreement

Provision of pedestrian and cycle links via Cygnet House and St Michaels Road

Vehicular access arrangements secured through legal agreement

Highway/access improvements to/from Swan Lane

Appropriate highways improvements to be agreed by the Local Authority and Highways Authority.

Delivery and phasing of link road between the A140 and Swan Lane

Appropriate delivery and to be agreed by the Local

54

Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies Authority and Highways Authority.

The application of safeguarding provisions in Norfolk Minerals and Waste Core Strategy

Safeguarding provisions agreed through planning application.

Allocation of 9.5 hectares of employment land

Take up of allocated land within use classes B1, B2 and B8 in line with the proposals in the AAP

Masterplanned as part of the adjoining housing development

Masterplan to be agreed by the Local Authority.

Development to enhance and improve through design and landscaping the approach/gateway to Long Stratton from the south.

Detailed design that enhances and improves the gateway to Long Stratton from the south agreed through planning application

Improved pedestrian and cycle links Improved pedestrian and cycle links secured through legal agreement

The application of safeguarding provisions in Norfolk Minerals and Waste Core Strategy

Safeguarding provisions agreed through planning application (if necessary/appropriate)

LNGS2 Allocation of land west of Tharston Industrial Estate

Allocation of 2.5 hectares of employment land

Take up of allocated land within use classes B1, B2 and B8 in line with the proposals in the AAP

South Norfolk Council Private Sector Developers Norfolk County Council

Improved pedestrian and cycle links Improved pedestrian and

55

Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies cycle links secured through legal agreement

Access from Salamanca Road and direct from the Stratton Motor Company site

Access arrangements secured through legal agreement

Retention/diversion of footpath Footpath arrangements secured through legal agreement

Design and landscaping to the open countryside

Design and landscaping agreed through planning application

INDICATORS AND TARGETS FOR OTHER POLICIES AND PROPOSALS IN THE LONG STRATTON AAP LNGS3 Town Centre Policy Development proposals for shopping,

food and drink, leisure and other main town centre uses will be encouraged within the defined town centre boundary

Town centre uses located within the defined town centre boundary

South Norfolk District Council

There should be no unacceptable concentration of non-A1 uses within the primary frontage of Long Stratton Shopping Area

No unacceptable concentration of non-A1 uses

LNGS4 Sequential Approach The requirement for all new retail, leisure and office development of 500 sq m or more to submit a sequential assessment of any available sequentially preferable locations for potential alternative sites

Sequential assessments submitted for all new retail, leisure and offices developments of 500 sq m or more


LNGS5 Preserving and enhancing the historic

Development proposals should not have a negative impact on the character of

Measures to preserve and enhance the historic


56

Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies character of Long Stratton

the Long Stratton, or cause substantial harm to the significance of heritage assets

character of Long Stratton town centre agreed through planning applications (secured through planning condition if necessary)

LNGS6 General Green Infrastructure requirements for new developments

New developments must maintain, protect and enhance green infrastructure

Improvements agreed through planning applications (secured through planning condition/legal agreement)


New developments required to provide

ecological links to the nearest green infrastructure and provide ecological buffers

Buffer design agreed with Local Authority

New developments to improve habitat connectivity, public access, recreational provision and the quality of County Wildlife Sites

Relevant improvements agreed through planning application

New planning proposals should aspire to net biodiversity gain and be accompanied by detailed ecological assessment

Detailed ecological assessment provided at time of planning application

The consideration of the cumulative impact of developments on biodiversity assets

The consideration of the cumulative impacts of development on biodiversity considered at time of planning application

LNGS7 Protecting existing recreation or amenity

The protection and enhancement of existing recreation or amenity land

Existing recreation and amenity land protected and

South Norfolk Council

57

Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies land within the town with the change of use

or redevelopment of this land only being permitted where it meets the criteria of the policy

enhanced with redevelopment only being permitted in line with policy criteria

LNGS8 New recreation provision in Long Stratton

Developer requirement to provide new on-site public open space in Long Stratton using the Council’s 1994 recreational open space standards

Provision of public open space in accordance with South Norfolk Council’s 1994 Recreational Open space standards.


New development to provide green infrastructure to create a network for safe movement around the urban environment of Long Stratton and for non-vehicular access to the countryside to strengthen informal recreation

Provision of green infrastructure agreed through planning application

LNGS9 Land for new burial ground in Long Stratton

Provision of new burial ground in keeping with the character of the surrounding area

Suitable site for a new burial ground agreed through planning application

South Norfolk Council Private Sector Developers Environment Agency

Provision of new burial ground that will not have an adverse impact on the amenity of local residents


Provision of new burial ground that is appropriately located in relation to public transport


Provision of new burial ground that has adequate vehicular access, including parking arrangements for disable users

Suitable site for a new burial ground agreed through planning application (secured through planning

58

Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies condition/legal agreement)

Provision of new burial ground that will have no significant impact on controlled waters (groundwater or surface water)

Suitable site for a new burial ground agreed through planning application (secured through planning condition)

Provision of new burial ground that will have no significant impact on the ecological value of the area


Provision of new burial ground that will have no significant impact on nationally important heritage assets and any impact on lesser significant assets is significantly lessened


LNGS10 Accessibility New development to improve permeability for pedestrians and cyclists to/from access town centre, key services and facilities, education, health care and wider countryside.

Provision of enhanced accessibility agreed through planning application

South Norfolk Council Norfolk County Council

The layout of new development will improve bus circulation and connectivity which will increase bus usage.

Provision of enhanced accessibility agreed through planning application

LNGS11 Long Stratton Development Boundary

The Council to be supportive of development proposals in Long Stratton located on sites within the development

General support for planning applications within the development boundary subject to other material

South Norfolk Council

59

Policy References Proposal Key Indicators Targets Responsible Bodies boundary considerations

Planning permission for proposals outside the defined development boundary will only be granted if they satisfy specific criteria in the Development Management Policies document

Planning permission only granted outside the development boundary if applications satisfy criteria in the Development Management Policies document

APPENDIX 1 – JOINT CORE STRATEGY POLICY FOR LONG STRATTON Policy 10 from the JCS states that development in Long Stratton is intended to ensure the delivery of the Long Stratton Bypass, and will include; At least 1,800 dwellings, the full level and phasing of growth at this

location is dependent on overcoming sewerage constraints; Improvements to the town centre including traffic management ,

environmental enhancement and expanded facilities; Secondary school provision will be provided in, or by the expansion of, the

existing school; Investment in strategic infrastructure corridor reflecting and conserving the

ancient landscape to the east of the village; Transport improvements including bus priority at the A140/A47 junction

and enhanced route to the city centre; Safe and direct cycle and pedestrian access to the town centre and

employment locations; and Additional local employment opportunities.

SOUTH NORFOLK COUNCIL DRAFT SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL REPORT FOR THE LONG STRATTON

AREA ACTION PLAN

July 2014

2

Chapter Contents Page

0 Non-Technical Summary 4

1 Introduction 16

2 Strategic Environmental Assessment and Sustainability Appraisal Legislative Requirements and Approach

19

3 South Norfolk Local Plan Context 23

4 Task A1 – Review of Literature, Plans, Programmes and Policies

24

5 Task A2 – Baseline Information: Social, Environmental and Economic

30

6 Task A3 – Sustainability Issues 45

7 Task A4 – Developing the Sustainability Appraisal Framework

55

8 Task A5 – Consulting on the Scope of the Sustainability Appraisal

55

9 Task B1 – Testing Long Stratton Area Action Plan Objectives against the Sustainability Appraisal Framework

56

10 Task B2 – Developing the Alternative Options 62

11 Task B3 – Predicting the Effects of the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

78

12 Task B4 – Evaluating the Effects of the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

87

13 Task B5 – Mitigating the Effects and Maximising Benefits 98

14 Task B6 – Monitoring of Significant Effects 99

3

Appendices

Appendix Content

1 Review of relevant plans, policies and programmes

2 Baseline Information

3 Consultation responses made during previous SA consultation stages, and the Council’s responses

4 Consultation comments made to the Site Assessment criteria and the Council’s responses

5 Sustainability Appraisal of Site Assessment criteria

6 Completed Site Assessment Tables

7 Sustainability appraisal of broad housing options

8 Sustainability appraisal of broad employment land options

9 Sustainability Appraisal of other policies and proposals in the AAP

4

Non-Technical Summary

Background 0.1 The Long Stratton Area Action Plan (AAP) forms part of the South

Norfolk Local Plan and sets out chosen sites for the development and use of land within the Long Stratton AAP area. The Local Plan is being produced in accordance with the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and the Localism Act 2011.

0.2 European Directive 2001/42/EC requires the identification and evaluation of the environmental impacts of certain plans through a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), the aim of which is to ensure that a high level of protection is given to the environment. The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 (as amended) extends the requirements of the European Directive by requiring the preparation of Sustainability Appraisal reports to also take into consideration social and economic concerns. Sustainability Appraisal (SA) is a statutory requirement of plan making and South Norfolk Council has therefore prepared a SA Report for the Long Stratton AAP in accordance with European Directive 2001/42/EC.

0.3 The preparation of the SA has been an iterative process to support the preparation of the plan and has also followed guidance in the DCLG Plan Making Manual (2010).

Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report (2010)

0.4 SA Scoping Report was initially prepared in summer 2010, to cover all the South Norfolk Local Plan Documents together (the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, the Wymondham AAP, the Long Stratton AAP and the Development Management Policies Document).

0.5 The SA Scoping Report includes a review of all relevant plans, programmes and policies (updated in this draft SA), provides a baseline for key environmental, social and economic data, and identifies issues and problems which need to be addressed through the South Norfolk Local Plan Documents. Finally, the scoping report also provides a framework and set of objectives for the assessment of all policies and reasonable alternatives within the main document.

0.6 The SA Scoping Report was consulted upon widely with both statutory consultees and a number of other organisations. The 2010 consultation on the scoping report provided useful feedback on the key environmental, economic and social factors which have helped to shape the development of the South Norfolk Local Plan Documents. Consultation comments were considered carefully, and as a result some minor amendments were made to the Sustainability Appraisal framework and objectives.

5

Review of Literature, Plans, Programmes and Policies

0.7 The South Norfolk Local Plan Documents, including the Long Stratton AAP are influenced by other plans, policies and programmes. Not only does the AAP document need to be developed in conformity to international and national guidance it also needs to be developed within a broad range of sustainability objectives.

0.8 The SA Scoping Report reviewed a wide range of relevant European, national, regional and local documents. As part of this review, the following key implications/considerations were identified (all being key elements of the adopted Joint Core Strategy):

Supporting local economic growth, through the provision of new employment land.

Ensure there is an adequate supply of new housing, to meet all the objectively assessed needs of the District.

Ensuring the sustainable use of transport – specific consideration to the location of sites where there is access to public transport.

Protection and enhancement of the natural and built environment – ensuring new housing and employment areas are not located within the most sensitive environments and protecting sensitive landscapes, biodiversity and historical assets.

Ensuring the effective use of natural resources and minimising the vulnerability to climate change.

Minimising flood risk – ensuring new allocations neither increase flood risk in areas or are located on sites at high risk of flooding.

0.9 One change to planning policy of particular note during the preparation of the South Norfolk Local Plan Documents and the SA has been the publication of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) in March 2012. This superseded and streamlined previous national planning guidance (principally Planning Policy Statements); however the key objectives of national guidance remain largely unaltered. The NPPF introduced a “presumption in favour of sustainable development”, and the explicit requirement to demonstrate that documents are viable. In addition to the NPPF, the Localism Act (2011) also abolished the regional tier of governance from the planning system and revoked the East of England Regional Spatial Strategy.

6

Baseline Information: Social, Environmental and Economic

0.10 Environmental, economic and social information was gathered to provide a baseline of the current situation within the district. This information includes a spatial portrait of South Norfolk, including information on the environment and landscape, water resources, waste, energy resources, education, the economy, transport provision and access to services. A “business as usual” evolution of the baseline has also been prepared; the conclusion being that with the adopted Joint Core Strategy in place, the baseline evolution would not be significantly different without the implementation of South Norfolk Local Plan Documents such as the Long Stratton AAP.

Key Sustainability Issues and Opportunities

0.11 The review of the plans, policies and programmes together with the baseline data has highlighted a number of key sustainability issues and opportunities which could affect development within South Norfolk. These have been fully taken into consideration through the preparation of the South Norfolk Local Plan Documents, including the Long Stratton AAP. The key points identified are:

South Norfolk has a wealth of natural assets and historic assets which need to be protected from development pressures and enhanced.

There is a lack of previously developed land within the district, so much of the new development will need to be on greenfield land.

There are high levels of motor vehicle use within the district, with a need for modal shift to non-car transport to occur.

More jobs should be located closer to centres of population, reducing the dependence on the private car.

Household sizes within South Norfolk are becoming smaller and individuals are living longer.

There are significant pockets of deprivation within the area, particularly affecting rural communities.

There is a need to provide improved access to the countryside and local green spaces.

There is a need to improve the quality of both new and existing housing stock.

There is currently an unbalanced workforce, with graduates frequently taking up intermediate jobs, presenting difficulties for those with lower qualifications from accessing work.

7

The Sustainability Appraisal Framework

0.12 The SA Framework was developed having regard to the key issues and opportunities identified above and this was consulted on through the Scoping Report in 2010. The Framework was based around a number of objectives and indicators and represents a recognised approach to the assessment of the environmental, economic and social impacts resulting from a plan. It also allows the comparison of individual policies and allocations. The SA Framework is shown in Table 0.1 below:

Table 0.1 – Environmental, Social & Economic Objectives

Environmental Objectives

ENV 1 To maintain and enhance biodiversity, geodiversity, species and habitat quality, and avoid habitat fragmentation

ENV 2 To limit or reduce vulnerability to climate change, including minimising the risks from flooding

ENV 3 To maximise the use of renewable energy solutions and reduce contributions to climate change

ENV 4 To reduce the effect of traffic on the environment

ENV 5 To improve air quality and minimise noise, vibration and light pollution

ENV 6 To maintain and enhance the distinctiveness and quality of landscapes, townscapes and the historic environment

ENV 7 To minimise the loss of undeveloped land and conserve and improve the quality of soil resources

ENV 8 To improve water qualities and provide for sustainable sources of supply and sustainable use

ENV 9 To minimise the production of waste and increase recycling

Social Objectives

S 1 To provide everybody with the opportunity to live in a decent, suitable and affordable home

S 2 To reduce poverty, inequality and social exclusion

S 3 To offer opportunities for all sections of the population to have rewarding and satisfying employment

S 4 To improve accessibility to essential services, facilities and the workplace, particularly for those most in need

8

S 5 To improve the education and skills of the population overall

S 6 To improve the health of the population overall

S 7 To encourage local community identity and foster mixed communities with co-operative attitudes, helping to reduce anti-social activity

S 8 To improve the quality of where people live

Economic Objectives

EC 1 To encourage sustained economic growth

EC 2 To encourage and accommodate both indigenous and inward investment promoting a positive image of the District

EC 3 To encourage efficient patterns of movement in support of economic growth

EC 4 To improve the social and environmental performance of the economy

EC 5 To improve economic performance in rural areas

0.13 For the purposes of the Long Stratton AAP it was considered that not all of the SA objectives were directly relevant, therefore some objectives were scoped out as shown in Chapter 9 of the main SA report.

Testing the Long Stratton Area Action Plan Objectives against the SA Framework

0.14 The Council used the SA Framework to test the objectives of the Long Stratton AAP. This showed that there is generally a high level of compatibility and most of the AAP objectives have a neutral or positive effect on meeting the SA Framework Objectives. A few potential conflicts were flagged up, primarily related to the environmental objectives and the requirement to allocate land for new housing and employment uses. These conflicts can be addressed and mitigated through the SA process.

Developing Alternative Options

0.15 The adopted JCS allocates at ‘least’ 1,800 new houses and employment development to serve local needs in major growth locations to Long Stratton along with a variety of other infrastructure improvements relating particularly to transport and green infrastructure. This requirement needs to be set against a number of constraints affecting the location and quantum of growth in the town; the need to ensure that the housing delivers a bypass, overcoming sewerage constraints and

9

the need to reflect and conserve the historic landscape to the east of the village.

0.16 Developing alternative options in the Long Stratton AAP can be split into 2 distinct sections:

1. Assessing the sites proposed for development (following the same process that was used to assess sites for the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document) to enable broad options for the location of growth in Long Stratton to be developed and evaluated leading to the allocation of development sites; and

2. Developing additional policies and proposals specific to the AAP, presenting alternative options where appropriate, leading to final policy wordings.

Assessing Site Sustainability

0.17 In total, 25 individual sites were taken through a site assessment process. Firstly each site was assessed on its own merits against a detailed site checklist. This checklist included 39 different criteria grouped under a number of main headings as shown below. To ensure that the site assessment process itself was robust an SA of the site assessment criteria was undertaken.

Location principles (relationship to settlement hierarchy and settlement boundaries);

Existing land use policies (such as whether a site falls within a Primary Shopping Area);

Undeveloped land (whether the site is brownfield/greenfield and the agricultural land classification);

Landscape/ Townscape/ Historic environment designations (such as whether the site is close to a Conservation Area or Scheduled Monument);

Current land use (whether the site is in use or vacant);

Ecology/biodiversity (for instance, whether the site is close to a Site of Special Scientific Interest);

Contamination/pollution (whether any is known to be present);

Flood risk (whether the site is within Flood Zone 1, 2 or 3)

Hazardous zone (whether the site falls within a hazardous zone as defined by the Health & Safety Executive)

10

Public transport access (whether the site is within 800m of a bus service to a market town or Norwich)

Utilities (whether known to be in place or inadequate)

Access to local services (whether the site has access to 0, 1-4, or 5 local services (such as school, bus service, healthcare and food store))

Other material considerations such site availability (whether the site is being actively promoted, and whether multiple landowners are involved)

0.18 The results of the individual site assessments were shown in a ‘traffic light’ assessment table where major constraints were shown as red, less serious impacts shown as amber and no direct impacts shown as green. However, this is merely illustrative of the issues considered when assessing sites. It would be over-simplistic to assume that a site with more green results would automatically be preferred over a site with several red or amber results. Professional judgment was also used to assess each site on its own merits, considering what mitigation would be required to make the site acceptable, and whether this mitigation would be likely to result in a viable development.

0.19 Each assessed site has a section with overall comments, within which the conclusion on the acceptability (or otherwise) of the site is reached. This balances consideration of all the criteria scores and comments received in reaching the conclusion.

Developing Options/Alternatives

0.20 Because of the high level of growth allocated to Long Stratton in the JCS the consideration of alternatives has been a fundamental element in the development of the Long Stratton AAP.

0.21 The Council used the results of the individual site assessments together with comments from public consultation, the objectives of the AAP and the key sustainability issues identified in the SA Scoping Report to develop a number of options for the distribution of housing and employment growth in the town.

0.22 The JCS considered that ‘at least’ 1,800 homes an appropriate amount needed to deliver a bypass plus the other necessary infrastructure, such as improvements to school provision, affordable housing, recreation facilities etc. It was considered that a higher level of development in Long Stratton would place an increased burden on other infrastructure in the village, such as secondary school provision, and on the remaining unimproved parts of the A140, which would be more complex to resolve.

11

Developing Other Policies and Proposals in the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

0.23 The Long Stratton AAP is about more than a simple assessment of sites suggested for development. The AAP also contains a number of other policies and proposals specific to Long Stratton. Because of their nature many of these policies and proposals do not have alternative options but they have still been subject to SA to identify any potential effects that may need to be mitigated.

Predicting and Evaluating the Effects of the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

0.24 To enable the effects of the options for the distribution of housing and employment growth in Long Stratton to be predicted each option was tested against the SA Framework. This showed that each option has potential positive and negative effects which have been summarised and evaluated to allow the Council to develop its Preferred Options for housing and employment growth.

0.25 The Council also tested the other policies and proposals in the AAP against the SA Framework to determine whether these would have any significant effects.

Overall Effects of the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

0.26 The overall effect of the pattern of growth in South Norfolk was assessed as part of the Sustainability Appraisal of the adopted JCS (September 2009). In setting the settlement hierarchy for South Norfolk, the JCS SA considered synergistic and cumulative impacts such as water quality and biodiversity. It has been concluded that the likely significant environmental effects of the Long Stratton AAP will be broadly similar to those identified in the JCS SA e.g. the loss of agricultural land and some impacts on landscape character due to the need for the majority of new development to be on greenfield sites. However, the level of growth proposed for Long Stratton is also likely to lead to an increase in the self sustainability of Long Stratton through a better balance of homes and jobs, greater levels of walking, cycling and public transport use and significantly improved levels of green infrastructure.

Short-term effects

0.27 Most of the impacts resulting from the Long Stratton AAP will be permanent; however there will be some short-term impacts whilst construction is taking place e.g. noise, dust and HGV movements. The potential extraction of sand and gravel from a site prior to the commencement of a development could be viewed as a positive short term effect, particularly if used in on-site construction activity.

12

Medium and long-term effects

0.28 Once built new development sites will have permanent medium and long terms impacts. The level of growth proposed in Long Stratton will require expansion of the development boundary into open countryside with resulting loss of agricultural land and potential adverse impact on landscape character.

0.29 It is inevitable that major growth will lead to an increase in car usage in the town however particular effort has been made to allocate sites close to public transport links and which are accessible to services and facilities to maximise walking and cycling.

0.30 Concentrating the majority of new growth to the east of Long Stratton will have some positive environmental benefits with the provision of increased green infrastructure. Development to the east will deliver a bypass and therefore offers real opportunities to improve the centre of Long Stratton and to co-locate services and facilities with new housing in the area. Housing to the North West of Long Stratton will be well located to the town centre with good access to the high school, heath facilities, shopping and public transport to benefit existing and future residents of Long Stratton. The provision of new and the expansion of existing of employment land in Long Stratton will retain and generate more employment activity in the village itself minimising the need for residents to commute to Norwich and other locations and encourage self-containment.

Cumulative and synergistic effects

0.31 The JCS SA considered potential cumulative/synergistic effects of JCS policies and the potential impacts on water quality and biodiversity were considered to be of particular importance.

0.32 Other cumulative effects will also be likely to occur through the implementation of the Long Stratton AAP alongside the Site Specific Allocations and Policies document, the Wymondham Area Action Plan, the Cringleford Neighbourhood Plan and Norwich City Local Plan. Together these could include pressure on local services and infrastructure such as water supply, wastewater treatment capacity and major transport junctions. Some cumulative impacts could be positive such as enabling thresholds for key services to be reached.

Consideration of Alternatives

0.33 Alternatives have been considered in three different areas:

1. Due to the capacity constraints at the waste treatment works and the need for housing to support the delivery of a bypass, it was concluded that there were no ‘reasonable alternatives’ (by way of higher housing numbers) to the minimum 1,800 dwellings allocated to Long Stratton in the Joint Core Strategy.

13

2. Each of the 25 proposed sites was assessed in detail, with the results forming part of the Preferred Options consultation in March 2013.

3. A range of strategic options for the location of the 1,800 dwellings (concentrated to the south east and north west of Long Stratton and the 12 hectares of new employment land were considered and appraised before the final choice of allocated sites was made.

Mitigation Measures

0.34 Key mitigation measures to support the overall level of growth in South Norfolk have been considered as an integral part of the Joint Core Strategy (JCS). The Long Stratton AAP also includes elements of mitigation such as major transport improvements (at the A140/A47 Harford Junction, for instance), the need for new schools, improved green infrastructure, utilities upgrades and new community facilities.

0.35 The JCS provides for a range of improvements required for strategic provisions of transport, green infrastructure and utilities, to be funded by a combination of developer contributions, utility providers, Norfolk County Council and the Highways Agency.

0.36 Site specific mitigation measures were considered as an integral part of assessing the suitability of sites in the Long Stratton area. In cases where necessary and appropriate mitigation was not thought to be achievable that site was not allocated. The Long Stratton AAP includes policy considerations to address and mitigate identified effects in relation to allocated sites. Such considerations include the requirement for local off-site road improvements, foul and surface water drainage network improvements, the provision of landscaping, the provision of a new school, design requirements for developments to be sympathetic to particular local circumstances.

0.37 Although each site’s mitigation requirements differ, common mitigation measures required for allocated sites include elements such as:

the need for appropriate boundary landscaping on sites which will extend the footprint of a settlement into the countryside to provide a ‘soft’ edge;

Improvements to public transport, walking and cycling;

Phasing of housing and employment development to ensure sufficient waste water capacity and required infrastructure for development in in place.

Contributions to maintaining, protecting and improving green infrastructure in and around Long Stratton to alleviate potential indirect impacts of housing developments on sites such as Wood Green and Tyrells Wood/New Plantation County Wildlife Sites.

14

The need to consider, where relevant (on specific sites only) whether extraction of sand and gravel prior to development taking place is feasible and deliverable.

Monitoring of Significant Effects

0.38 The monitoring regime for the SA of the Long Stratton AAP will track the same indicators as the other South Norfolk Local Plan documents (including the Joint Core Strategy).

0.39 To monitor the evolution of the effects the Long Stratton AAP will have

on the baseline information (monitored through indicators), the focus will be on use of public transport as well as walking and cycling as a means to access services, facilities and employment and to monitor the impacts on landscape, townscape and historic character associated with growth. Clearly the delivery of housing and employment land will continue to be monitored (as it has been for decades).

Long Stratton Area Action Plan – Preferred Options Consultation – May – July 2013 and Consultation on Interim SA Report 0.40 The Preferred Options consultation document outlined the sites that the

Council intended to allocate for housing and employment, as well a number of other specific policies and proposals for Long Stratton. The justification for these sites, policies and proposals was outlined in an interim SA Report which accompanied the Preferred Options consultation.

Update since the 2013 Preferred Options Consultation

0.41 The Interim SA Report has been updated to take into account the responses to the Preferred Options public consultation which took place between May and July 2013. This has resulted in the publication of this Draft SA Report, dated July 2014.

0.42 In addition to minor changes to policies and supporting text, the Council has granted planning permission for 120 dwellings at Chequers Road in Tharlston. Changes to the development boundary to encompass this application were reflected within the Preferred Option consultation.

0.43 The capacity of the waste water treatment works and impacts on the WFD were identified during the Preferred Options consultation as an area for further attention. Following the preferred options consultation, the Council organised a meeting with the Environment Agency and Anglian Water to discuss suitable options to enable development of 1,800 homes to come forward in Long Stratton, ensure sufficient waste water capacity and meet the WFD. Overall, both Environment Agency and Anglian Water confirm their joint position statement remains unchanged to that which was submitted during the Preferred Option consultation - ‘over the longer term, providing the development is suitably phased waste treatment and the protecting the environment need note pose a significant obstacle to delivering the 1,800 dwellings proposed for Long Stratton’. The housing policy has been improved to

15

address the need for a foul water strategy which will set out the nature, timing and capacity improvements of the foul water public sewer.

0.44 The lack of burial provision was identified during the Preferred Options consultation. In response to this, the Council has included an additional policy to reflect current burial rates and support a new burial ground in Long Stratton if required within the plan period. Additionally, the Preferred Option consultation responses identified the importance of the historic environment of Long Stratton. An additional policy has now been included within the ‘Environment’ section to preserve and enhance the historic character of Long Stratton.

1. Introduction Terms of Reference 1.1 This is the Draft Sustainability Appraisal Report for the Long Stratton Area

Action Plan (AAP) incorporating the requirements of Sustainability Appraisal (SA) and Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA).

Purpose of the Sustainability Appraisal Report

1.2 This report is the Draft SA Report (Stage C) of the Sustainability Appraisal process. It incorporates the requirements of the Environmental Report as required by Article 5(1) of the SEA Directive. It is a key output of the appraisal process, presenting information on the effects of the plan. This report also covers Stages A and B of the SA/SEA process as presented in Table 1.1 below.

Preparation of the Sustainability Appraisal

1.3 South Norfolk Council officers have prepared all stages of the SA in-house, with advice, information and support from various partners and colleagues, such as Norfolk County Council, the Environment Agency, Natural England and English Heritage.

1.4 Table 1.1 below sets out the SA/SEA tasks and the timetable and

responsibility for completing these tasks in the context of the preparation of the Long Stratton AAP.

Table 1.1: SA/SEA Programme and Responsibilities

SA/SEA Stage SA Tasks When

Stage A: Setting the context, establishing the baseline and deciding the scope

A1: Identifying other relevant policies, plans and programmes, and sustainability objectives

August 2010 Revised May 2013

A2: Collecting baseline information


A3: Identifying sustainability issues and problems


A4: Developing the SA framework


A5: Consulting on the scope of the SA

August 2010

Stage B:

Developing and refining options and assessing

B1: Testing the Local Plan Document objectives against the SA framework

September 2012

B2: Developing the Local Plan Document options

August 2010 August 2011

17

effects May 2013

B3: Predicting the effects of the Preferred Options Local Plan Document

May 2013

B3: Predicting the effects of the Pre-Submission DPD

July 2014

B4: Evaluating the effects of the Preferred Options Local Plan Document

May 2013

B4: Evaluating the effects of the Pre-Submission DPD

July 2014

B5: Considering ways of mitigating adverse effects and maximising beneficial effects.

May 2013 July 2014

B6: Proposing measures to monitor the significant effects of implementing the DPDs.

July 2014

Stage C:

Preparing the SA Report

C1: Preparing the SA Report June 2014

Stage D:

Publication of the DPD and the SA Report

D1: Public participation on the Preferred Options DPD and the SA Report

May to June 2013

D2(i): Appraising significant changes

August to October 2014

Limitations of the SA/SEA

1.5 South Norfolk Council has relied on published data and information provided by others (as well as internal SNC data) in the production of this SA Report. The compiled sustainability baseline data has been used to provide a ‘snapshot’ of current key issues in South Norfolk.

Structure of the SA Report

1.6 The SA Report is set out as follows:

Section 1 of this report provides an introduction to the project including background, purpose of the SA Report, timetable for preparation and SA/SEA limitations;

Section 2 outlines the legislative context and requirements of SA and SEA and summarises the approach taken for the SA/SEA process;

18

Section 3 describes the South Norfolk Local Plan context, including the Joint Core Strategy and the emerging suite of Local Plan documents currently being prepared;

Section 4 presents the review of relevant literature, plans, programmes and policies and implications for the Long Stratton AAP and SA/SEA (Task A1);

Section 5 describes the sustainability baseline conditions for the South Norfolk Council area, including Long Stratton and also details the likely evolution of the baseline without the implementation of the Long Stratton AAP (Task A2);

Section 6 identifies the main sustainability issues and opportunities for South Norfolk and Long Stratton (Task A3);

Section 7 discusses the development of the SA Framework (Task A4)

Section 8 details the consultation on the scope of the SA (Task A5);

Section 9 presents the SA/SEA Framework including the objectives used to assess the proposed sites in the Long Stratton AAP, presents the findings from the compatibility test between the Long Stratton AAP objectives and SA/SEA objectives (Task B1);

Section 10 provides details of the individual assessment of sites, the development of broad options and the assessment of other policies and proposals in the Long Stratton AAP (Task B2);

Section 11 presents the predictions of the effects of the Long Stratton AAP (Task B3);

Section 12 presents the evaluation of the effects of the Long Stratton AAP (Task B4);

Section 13 presents the mitigation recommendations developed as a result of the appraisal to strengthen the Long Stratton AAP (Task B5); and

Section 14 provides details of the proposed monitoring framework linked to specific indicators (Task B6).

19

2. Strategic Environmental Assessment and Sustainability Appraisal Legislative Requirements and Approach

Legislative Requirements

2.1 Under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004) and the Development Plan Regulations, there is a requirement for local planning authorities to undertake a Sustainability Appraisal (SA) on each of its Local Development Documents. In July 2004 an assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment, known as Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA), became a statutory requirement in accordance with European Directive 2001/42/EC. The objective of the SEA Directive is to provide a high level of protection to the environment and to contribute to the integration of environmental considerations into the preparation and adoption of plans with a view to promoting sustainable development. The SEA also works to inform the decision-making process through the identification and assessment of the cumulative significant effects a plan or programme will have on the environment at the strategic level.

2.2 In accordance with the European Directive, the SEA Regulations and

Department for Communities and Local Government guidance, a combined SA/SEA has been undertaken on the Long Stratton Area Action Plan (AAP). Guidance on carrying out this SA/SEA was taken from:

Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents (DCLG, 2005; superseded 2010);

DCLG Plan-Making Manual: Sustainability Appraisal (2010; supersedes the above document);

A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (DCLG, 2006);

Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004.

Approach to the SA/SEA Process

2.3 In applying the SA/SEA to the Long Stratton AAP, South Norfolk Council aims to:

Identify options for delivering sustainable growth in housing, employment and facilities in South Norfolk;

Further enhance positive environmental, social and economic effects of the plan; and

20

Reduce and minimise the negative environmental, social and economic effects that may result from the implementation of the plan.

2.4 To ensure that the SA/SEA is robust and complies with current legislation

and best practice, it follows Stages A-E, identified in the DCLG document ‘A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment Directive’ and the DCLG ‘Plan-Making Manual’ see Figure 2.1 below:

Figure 2.1: The SA/SEA Process

Stage A – identifying other plans and programmes, establishing baseline conditions and SA/SEA objectives, identifying sustainability issues, developing the SA/SEA Framework and consulting on the scope;

Stage B – developing and refining options, predicting, evaluating and mitigating the effects. There have been a number of rounds of public consultation, the results of which have been incorporated in this SA Report;

Stage C – preparing the Draft SA Report. The SA/SEA guidance documents referred to above have been used to prepare this report;

Stage D – Consultation on the Interim SA Report took place in summer 2013 as part of the Preferred Options stage. This draft SA Report builds on this and consultation on the Pre-Submission Long Stratton AAP and the Draft SA Report will run from the August to October 2014;

Stage E – Stage not reached yet.

Stage A Setting the context, SA objectives, baseline, scope

Stage B Developing and refining options & assessing effects

Stage C Preparing the Sustainability Appraisal Report

Stage D Consulting on the draft DPD & draft SA Report

Stage E Monitoring implementation of the DPD

21

Components of the Environmental Report that make up the SA Report

2.5 This SA Report incorporates the requirements for an Environmental Report, as set out in the DCLG Plan-Making Manual. Table 2.2 below indicates where specific requirements of the Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Directive can be found within this report.

Table 2.2: SEA Directive Requirements Checklist

Environmental Report Requirements Section of this Report

An outline of the contents, main objectives of the plan or programme and relationship with other relevant plans and programmes

Section 3

The relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution thereof without implementation of the plan or programme

Section 5

The environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected

Section 5 and 6

Any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programme including, in particular, those relating to any areas of a particular environmental importance, such as areas designated pursuant to Directives 79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC

Section 6

The environmental protection objectives, established at international, Community or Member State level, which are relevant to the plan or programme and the way those objectives and any environmental considerations have been taken into account during its preparation

Section 4 and Appendix 2

The likely significant effects on the environment, including on issues such as biodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors

Section 11 and Appendices 6, 8, 9, 10

The measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and as fully as possible offset any significant adverse effects on the environment of implementing the plan or programme

Section 13

An outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with, and a description of how the assessment was undertaken including any difficulties (such as technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered in compiling the required information

Section 10

A description of the measures envisaged concerning monitoring in accordance with Article 10

Section 14

A non-technical summary of the information provided under Start of Report

22

the above headings

23

3. South Norfolk Local Plan Context

Norfolk Minerals and Was Introduction 3.1 A new system for the preparation of development plans was introduced

under the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004). Under this system, which was amended by the Localism Act (2011), a (Replacement) South Norfolk Local Plan is gradually being prepared, which will eventually supercede the adopted (2003) South Norfolk Local Plan.

The Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk 3.2 The Joint Core Strategy (JCS) was adopted in 2011 and covers the three

districts of Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk. It sets out the long-term vision and objectives for these areas, including strategic policies for steering and shaping development. It identifies broad locations for new housing and employment growth and changes to transport infrastructure and other supporting community facilities, as well as defining areas where development should be limited. It also helps co-ordinate and deliver other services and related strategies.

3.3 The JCS is designed to deliver substantial growth in housing and

employment but this is dependent on investment to overcome the deficiency in supporting infrastructure. The JCS cannot be delivered without the implementation of the Norwich Area Transportation Strategy including the Northern Distributor Road. Other fundamental requirements include significant investment in green infrastructure, education, waste and water infrastructure including Whitlingham sewage treatment works and a range of other community facilities.

3.4 The JCS runs to the end of March 2026.

The Emerging South Norfolk Local Plan 3.5 Sitting underneath the JCS is a suite of (emerging) South Norfolk Local

Plan Documents which will, alongside the JCS, form the complete Local Plan (once adopted). These Documents (which will all run to the end of March 2026) are:

The Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, which covers the whole of South Norfolk, apart from the areas in Long Stratton, Wymondham and Cringleford detailed below;

The Long Stratton AAP (the subject of this SA), which will guide development and change in the village, including delivering a minimum of 1800 dwellings and a Long Stratton Bypass;

The Wymondham Area Action Plan (AAP) which will guide development and change in the town, including delivering a minimum of 2200 dwellings, whilst protecting the historic character of the town and the Strategic Gap between Wymondham and Hethersett;

24

The Development Management Policies Document, which will contain a suite of policies (alongside JCS policies) to help determine how the Council will carry out its development management responsibilities to promote sustainable development in the district.

The Gypsy and Traveller Document, which will contain allocations and policies for gypsy and traveller sites.

Cringleford Neighbourhood Plan 3.6 Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan was formally adopted by

South Norfolk Council on 24 February 2014. This followed on from the positive outcome of the referendum on 24 January 2014, where a large majority of those who voted were in favour of the plan. The plan will aim to deliver a minimum of 1,200 new dwellings, whilst respecting the existing semi-rural open and green character of the village. Although it will not be a formal part of the South Norfolk Local Plan, it will form part of the Development Plan for South Norfolk, and planning applications in Cringleford will be assessed against the policies in the Neighbourhood Plan.

25

4. Task A1 - Review of Literature, Plans, Programmes and Policies

4.1 The sustainability appraisal guidance reflects the need for the Local

Planning Authority to take into account the relationships between the Local Plan document and other relevant policies, plans, programmes and sustainability objectives. The SEA Directive specifically requires environmental protection objectives established at international, European Community or national levels to be taken into account. Other relevant documents include the UK Sustainable Development Strategy, the NPPF, and a range of other plans and strategies, all of which may influence the options to be considered in preparation of the Local Plans document. Information on these relationships will enable potential synergies to be exploited and any inconsistencies and constraints to be addressed.

4.2 The Joint Core Strategy Scoping Report includes a wide ranging review of

the plans, programmes and policies which are likely to impact upon the proposals in the Joint Core Strategy area, of which South Norfolk is a part (see Appendix 1 of the Joint Core Strategy Scoping Report - http://www.gndp.org.uk/sustainabilityappraisal). There is a degree of overlap between documents with lower level documents reflecting and applying objectives and policies from higher-level documents.

4.3 The list of documents within the Joint Core Strategy Scoping Report have

been examined to establish whether any have been revised or superseded and whether any other lower level documents with particular relevance to the production of the South Norfolk Local Plan should be included.

4.4 Since the Scoping Report was published in 2010 the National Planning

Policy Framework (NPPF) has been published in March 2012, superseding the Planning Policy Statements and Guidance Notes (PPS’s and PPG’s). The NPPF has streamlined national planning policy; however, the majority of the core themes from the PPSs and PPGs remain. The NPPF has introduced a strong “presumption in favour of sustainable development.”

4.5 In addition to the NPPF there have been three other major changes since

the publication of the scoping report, the Localism Act received royal assent in 2011, the East of England Regional Spatial Strategy was formally abolished in January 2013 and the publishing of National Planning Practice Guidance in March 2014.

4.6 Table 4.1 provides a list of all of the relevant international, national,

regional, county and local level plans which have been reviewed. A full review of all of the literature and the consequent implications on the plans is included within Appendix 1.

http://www.gndp.org.uk/sustainabilityappraisal

26

Table 4.1 – International, National, Regional, County & Local Level Plans

International

The Rio Earth Summit (1992)

The Rio Earth Summit +20 (2012)

Kyoto Protocol and the UN Framework on Climate Change (1992)

The Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora Directive (92/43/EEC)

European Air Quality Framework Directive (96/62/EC)

European Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC

EC Directive on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (2001/42/EC)

Directive (2001/77/EC) Promotion of development of renewable energy sources and their use

The World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, (2002)

Directive on the Promotion of Biofuels and other Renewable Fuels for transport (2003/30/EC)

European Spatial Development Perspective

National

Planning (Control of Major Accident Hazards) Regulations (implements

obligations under Seveso II Directive Council Directive 96/82/EC

Saving Lives: Our Healthier Nation White Paper (1999)

DfT 10 year Transport Plan (2000)

Rural White Paper: Our Countryside (2000)

Urban White Paper- Our Towns and Cities: The Future (2000)

Air Quality Strategy for England etc (Jan 2000 + Feb. 2003 addendum)

Air Quality Strategy for England etc (Jan 2000 + Feb. 2003 addendum)

Sustainable Communities Plan: Building for the future (2003)

Rural Strategy (2004)

ODPM Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention (2004)

Securing the Future - the UK Sustainable Development Strategy 2005

Code for Sustainable Homes: A step-change in sustainable home building

practice. (2006)

UK Climate Change Programme (latest version March 2006)

Energy Review (2006)

Local Government White Paper 2006 – Strong and Prosperous Communities

State of the Countryside Report (2008)

27

Localism Act (2011)

National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

National Planning Practice Guidance (2014)

Technical Guidance to the National Planning Policy Framework (2012)

Planning Policy for Traveller Sites (2012)

Regional

A Sustainable Development Framework for the East of England (EERA, 2001)

A Sustainable Development Framework for the East of England (EERA, 2001)

Sustainable Communities in the East of England (2003)

Our Environment, Our Future. Regional Environmental Strategy for East of

England EERA (2003)

Sustainable Tourism Strategy for the East of England (2004)

Economic Strategy for the East of England EEDA (2004)

Sustainable Futures: The Integrated Regional strategy for the East of England

(2005)

East of England Social Strategy (2007)

East of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy (2008)

Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire Strategic Health Authority Health Strategy

2005 – 2010

Living with Climate Change in the East of England

East of England Plan: Single issue review ‘Planning for Gypsy and Traveller

Accommodation in the East of England’ (2009)

Water resources for the future: a strategy for the Anglian Region

Broadland Rivers Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy

Broadland Rivers Catchment Flood Management Plan

New Anglia Local Enterprise Partnership for Norfolk and Suffolk: Towards a

Growth Plan (2013)

Local

South Norfolk Crime Reduction Strategy (2003)

South Norfolk Corporate Equality Plan (2003)

South Norfolk Empty Homes Strategy (2003)

Norfolk Biodiversity Action Plan (2004)

Biodiversity SPG for Norfolk (2004)

The Broads Plan (2004)

South Norfolk Economic Development Strategy (2004

South Norfolk Tourism Strategy (2004)

28

Gypsies and Travellers Strategy for Norfolk (2005-2008)

Greater Norwich Housing Strategy (2005 – 2010)

South Norfolk Leisure/Culture & Countryside Strategy (2006-2016)

Towards Stronger Communities: South Norfolk’s Strategy for Community

Cohesion (Oct 2006)

Local Transport Plan for Norfolk 2006 – 2011 (inc. Transport Strategy to 2021)

Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy for Norfolk 2006 – 2020

The Broads Authority Local Development Framework Core Strategy (Adopted

2007)

Learning Disability Employment Plan for Norfolk (2007)

Tomorrow’s Norfolk, Today’s Challenge – A Climate Change Strategy for Norfolk

(2008)

Partnership of Norfolk Authorities Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (2008)

Norfolk Action – Norfolk’s Local Area Agreement (2008-11)

Breckland District Council Core Strategy and Development Control Policies DPD

(2009)

Waveney District Council Core Strategy (2009)

Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk (publication

document November 2009)

Greater Norwich Development Partnership Green Infrastructure Strategy (2007)

and Delivery Plan (2009)

GNDP Greater Norwich Economic Strategy (2009-2014)

South Norfolk Alliance Sustainable Community Strategy

South Norfolk Cycling Strategy

South Norfolk Corporate Environment Strategy

South Norfolk Council’s Strategy for Health and Well-Being

South Norfolk Local Agenda 21 Strategy

Norwich Area Transport Strategy

Norfolk Ambition (Norfolk Community Strategy)

Shaping the Future - an economic strategy for Norfolk and Waveney, and a social

cohesion strategy for Norfolk

Norfolk Core Strategy and Minerals and Waste Development Management

Policies DPD (2011)

Norfolk Minerals Site Specific Allocations Document (2013)

Norfolk Waste Site Specific Allocations Document (2013)

Historic Landscape Characterisation and Sensitivity Study (2009)

29

Landscape Character Assessment (2012)

South Norfolk Place Making Guide (2012)

Key Implications of the Policy Review 4.7 During the review of plans, programmes and policies, a number of key

issues were identified that needed to be included when developing the local plan document. A summary of these key issues includes:

Supporting local economic growth, through the provision of new employment land.

Ensure there is an adequate supply of new housing, to meet all the objectively assessed needs of the District.

Ensuring the sustainable use of transport – specific consideration to the location of sites where there is access to public transport.

Protection and enhancement of the natural and built environment – ensuring new housing and employment areas are not located within the most sensitive environments and protecting sensitive landscapes, biodiversity and historical assets.

Ensuring the effective use of natural resources and minimising the vulnerability to climate change.

Minimising flood risk – ensuring new allocations neither increase flood risk in areas or are located on sites at high risk of flooding.

5. Task A2 - Baseline Information: Social, Environmental and Economic

5.1 Baseline information provides the context for assessing the sustainability of

sites in the Long Stratton AAP (indeed, across the whole South Norfolk district), and it also provides the basis for identifying trends, predicting the likely effects of the plan and also monitoring its outcomes.

5.2 The baseline information was initially presented within the scoping report and

has been updated with the different iterations of the SA. Full information is attached as Appendix 2.

A Spatial Portrait of South Norfolk 5.3 The following chapter provides baseline information which has helped to

enable the identification of sustainability issues, which should be addressed through the various Local Plan documents. It will also act as a reference against which the sustainability implications of the Local Plan can be monitored.

Demographics 5.4 South Norfolk District is composed of 119 parishes, within 34 wards.

Table 5.1 – Demographic: Population

Baseline figures South Norfolk

Previous population 1991 Census 103,410

Previous households 1991 Census 43,916

Previous Population 2001 Census 110,710

Previous Households 2001 Census 46,607

Population 2011 Census 124,012

Households 2011 Census 52,809

Population 2011 (%):

a) 0 – 14 years old 16.7%

b) 16 – 44 years old 33.2%

c) 45 – 64 years old 28.7%

d) 65 years old and over 21.4%

Urban: rural split (%) 22.3: 77.7

Population density 2011 People/ ha 1.37

Projected population 2015 128,200

Projected population 2025 141,300

(Source: Norfolk Insight, ONS & South Norfolk AMR)

31

Environment & Landscape 5.5 The South Norfolk landscape is a mixture of broad, open arable farmland

plateaux and six main river valleys, including the major watercourses of the Rivers Yare and Waveney and the adjoining Norfolk and Suffolk Broads to the north and east. The geology of the district is characterised by glacial deposits. The local Landscape Character Assessment refines the national Landscape Character Areas which identified seven separate landscape types across the district.

5.6 Throughout the district there are a number of areas of locally significant landscape value. Many of these follow the route of important river valleys, predominantly along the River Wensum and the rivers Waveney, Tiffey, Yare, Tas, Tud and Chet. Additional areas of landscape value also include areas of open land that maintain a separation between certain settlements, and a large landscape protection area around the A47 south of Norwich, which is considered important for preserving the historic setting of the city of Norwich.

5.7 There are relatively few international nature conservation sites within South Norfolk, and none fall entirely within the boundary of the district (see paragraph 3.2 of the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document and Long Stratton AAP Habitat Regulations Assessment for more details). Four small component units of The Broads SAC/Broadland SPA are within South Norfolk between Surlingham and Loddon with two other very small component units near Geldeston on the District’s southern boundary. The River Wensum SAC forms the northern boundary of the district in the area near Costessey although for most of this section the SAC designation is mostly confined to the river channel rather than the wider floodplain. In addition, two component units of the Norfolk Valley Fens SAC are within South Norfolk, Coston Fen (near Runhall) and Flordon Common.

5.8 There are many valuable wildlife habitats of national and local importance in South Norfolk, with nearly 250 County Wildlife Sites and over 100 areas of ancient woodland. Of the 930 hectares of SSSI (across 26 sites), 86% were in ‘favourable’ or ‘unfavourable recovering’ condition in 2011.

32

Table 5.2 – SSSI Habitats in South Norfolk

SSSI name Habitat

Aslacton Parish Land Neutral grassland - lowland

Bramerton Pits Earth heritage

Broome Heath Pits Earth heritage

Caistor St. Edmund Chalk Pit Earth heritage

Coston Fen, Runhall Fen, marsh and swamp - lowland

Duncan's Marsh, Claxton Fen, marsh and swamp - lowland

Flordon Common Fen, marsh and swamp – lowland +

broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland -

lowland

Forncett Meadows Neutral grassland - lowland

Fritton Common Acid & Neutral grassland - lowland

Gawdyhall Big Wood, Harleston Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland

- lowland

Geldeston Meadows Fen, marsh and swamp – lowland +

standing open water and canals

Hardley Flood Fen, marsh and swamp – lowland &

standing open water and canals

Hedenham Wood Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland

- lowland

Leet Hill, Kirby Cane Earth heritage

Lower Wood, Ashwellthorpe Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland

- lowland

Poplar Farm Meadows, Langley Fen, marsh and swamp - lowland

Pulham Market Big Wood Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland

- lowland

River Wensum Rivers and streams + neutral grassland

- lowland

33

SSSI name Habitat

Sea Mere, Hingham Standing open water and canals &

neutral grassland - lowland

Sexton Wood Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland

- lowland

Shelfanger Meadows Neutral grassland - lowland

Shotesham Common Neutral grassland - lowland

Shotesham-woodton Hornbeam

Woods

Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland

- lowland

Stanley And Alder Carrs, Aldeby Fen, marsh and swamp - lowland

Tindall Wood, Ditchingham Broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland

- lowland

Yare Broads And Marshes Fen, marsh and swamp – lowland +

broadleaved, mixed and yew woodland

– lowland & standing open water and

canals

(Source: Natural England)

5.9 In addition to SSSIs South Norfolk contain many priority habitats and species

and 245 County Wildlife Sites cover 1835 hectares throughout the district.

5.10 The towns and villages scattered around the district are home to many historic buildings and heritage features, which help create their own distinctive character. The district has a wealth of listed buildings, scheduled monuments, and Conservation Areas. There are also historic gardens covering 25 hectares remaining from significant estates in the District, although at least 26 more hectares have been lost since the 1880s. There are also many areas of archaeological interest within the district, including a protected area of Roman-era hedgerow patterns in Dickleburgh. These sites all contribute towards the special character and distinctiveness found in South Norfolk.

34

Table 5.3 – Listed Buildings & Sites of Special Interest 2013

Asset Number

Grade I Listed Buildings 102

Grade II* Listed Buildings 147

Grade II Listed Buildings 3061

Scheduled Ancient Monuments 35

Sites of local archaeological interest 2875

Historic Parks and Gardens (English Heritage

Register)

7

Figure 5.1: Natural England National Landscape Character Areas. Source: East of

England Plan (2008)

35

Figure 5.2: Agricultural Land Classification. Source: www.magic.gov.uk

36

Figure 5.3: Landscape Types and Character Areas of South Norfolk. Source: South Norfolk Landscape Assessment (2001)

37

Water Resources

5.11 East Anglia is recognised as one of the driest areas of the country. Pressure on water resource supplies is exacerbated by lower rainfall, the large agricultural economy as well as continued residential and employment growth. Water is a vital societal, ecological and economic resource. Increased pressure on water quality, supply and drainage/flooding aspects are significant issues for the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document and the two Area Action Plans to assess/take into consideration. The presence of the Broads Authority area (which has a status equivalent to a National Park) and numerous international, national and locally important water-based conservation areas highlights the importance of water resources in the plan area.

5.12 Rivers such as the Wensum, Yare and Waveney are important aspects

of the catchment area across South Norfolk, feeding into the Broads, providing nutrients as well as important habitats in their own right. The Broads and parts of the Wensum are designated as internationally important ‘Special Areas of Conservation’.

Waste, Energy and Resources

5.13 The reduction of waste and increasing re-use and recycling in the district are key Council priorities. South Norfolk is amongst the lowest producers of household waste per capita in Norfolk (351kg per person), recycling 40% and composting 14% of its household waste in 2012/13. There are a number of small household-size renewable energy projects installed across the district, but as of yet no major renewable energy generation facilities exist. All households in South Norfolk now have an alternate weekly kerbside waste and recycling service through which paper, card, metal cans and plastic bottles are collected for recycling. In addition the County Council provides four Household Waste Recycling Centres within South Norfolk and there are 125 community-based mini recycling centres providing facilities for recycling glass bottles, textiles and other materials throughout the District. Future waste strategies will reduce the amount of waste collected from every household, maximise the rate of recycling and extend the range of materials recycled or composted.

5.14 The Council has a published Environment Strategy (2008) that sets out the upcoming challenges and a range of measures to tackle them. The Environment Strategy covers the following topics:

Managing the environmental impact of Council activities

Understanding and preparing for future climatic impacts in South Norfolk

Reducing energy consumption and use of natural resources

38

Transport

Air, land and water quality

Bio and geo-diversity

Built and urban environment

Managing waste

5.15 The Environment Strategy can be downloaded via the following link: http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/democracy/media/environment_strategy.pdf

5.16 South Norfolk’s ecological footprint was assessed as 5.80 global hectares (gha) per person, which is above the UK average of 5.4 gha. Whilst there is clearly a need to reduce both national and local ecological footprints to sustainable levels, South Norfolk’s higher than average assessment reflects the high food and transport energy costs to be found in a predominantly rural district.

Society and Housing

5.17 The residents of South Norfolk are some of the healthiest in the country, although the higher levels of deprivation in Costessey and Diss do present some challenges. Educational achievement in 2012 was slightly below the national average at GCSE level. Crime levels are also lower than the national average.

5.18 The district is not ranked highly in the Index of Deprivation (ranking 291 out of 354), although some pockets of deprivation exist. Old Costessey is the most deprived ward in the district, and is within the third most deprived nationally for income, education and child poverty. The district’s rural character presents some problems in accessing services, with five wards in the district being within the thousand most deprived nationally.

5.19 Housing within the district is predominantly owner-occupied (79%). 335 Affordable Homes had been delivered by South Norfolk, by the end of March 2013, against the three year target of 500 for the period 2011-2014. Characterised by a large proportion of older, rural housing stock, South Norfolk has the highest share of the Greater Norwich housing stock that fails to meet the ‘decent homes’ standard. The price of houses in South Norfolk has increased the most rapidly in Greater Norwich, and the average price is consistently above the Norfolk average.

http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/democracy/media/environment_strategy.pdf

http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/democracy/media/environment_strategy.pdf

39

Table 5.4 – Demographic: Stock

Housing Stock No. of units Percentage

Owner Occupied 40,092 75.9%

Private Rented 6,752 12.8%

Registered Social Landlord /

Housing Association

5,965 11.3%

Total 52,809 -

(Source: NOMIS 2013)

Figure 5.1 South Norfolk Average House Prices (Mean) Source: Norfolk Insight

Education 5.20 The provision of education in South Norfolk is typical for a predominantly

rural district. First and primary schools of varying sizes are located throughout the area with high schools concentrated on the larger market towns and within Norwich. Further education is primarily from the major urban centres abutting South Norfolk e.g. Norwich and Great Yarmouth.

5.21 Attainment levels in South Norfolk are good, with schools throughout the district achieving higher qualification rates than the Norfolk average - only slightly below the regional and national average.

40

Table 5.5 – Demographic: Education

South

Norfolk

Norfolk East of

England

England

% people working age (16yrs and over) with no qualifications (at 2011)

22.6% 26.3% 22.5% 22.5%

% GCSE and equivalent results,

percentage of pupils gaining -

achieving 5+ A*-C 2012

79.7% 73.9% 80.6% 81.8%

% people of working age (16-

74yrs) with highest qualification

gained from level 4/5 (GCE ‘A’

level or equivalent (at 2011)

17.7% 14.6% 17.3% 18.6%

(Source: 2011 Census and Norfolk Insight) Economy 5.22 For a predominantly rural area, South Norfolk is relatively affluent, and

does not have the significant issues of unemployment or deprivation of more urban areas. Some residents do experience issues associated with low income, at or towards the minimum wage (average adult earnings are 8% more than the national average 2012). Obtaining access to public transport services, especially in the more remote parts of the district, is often problematic for accessing the workplace.

5.23 Within South Norfolk, the biggest employers are the Norfolk and Norwich Hospital and the Norwich Research Park at Colney. More than half of South Norfolk’s resident workforce is employed within Norwich City’s area. Wymondham is recognised as a regionally important strategic employment centre and is already home to nearby Lotus Cars, the Hethel Engineering Centre, Gateway 11 Business Park and the Norfolk Police Headquarters.

5.24 The majority of employers in the district are small; only 5% employ more than 25 people. To the south of the district, most of the land is used for agriculture and food related uses, which remains a significant influence. Despite the rural nature of the district, agriculture, forestry and fishing only form 3.0% of employment. Nearly 50% are employment is in manufacturing; wholesale and retail trade; repair of motor vehicles and motor cycles; education; human health & social work activities.

41

Table 5.6 – Demographic: Business

Sector (% of total employment) South Norfolk

East of England

England

Manufacturing 9.3% 8.7% 8.8%

Construction 8.8% 8.6% 7.7%

Accommodation & food service activities 4.3% 4.7% 5.6%

Professional, scientific & technical activities 6.5% 6.8% 6.7%

Banking, finance, insurance etc. 5.2% 5.0% 4.4%

Public administration & defence; compulsory social security

5.4% 5.6% 5.9%

(Source: Nomis, Annual Business Inquiry 2011)

Transport and Access to Services

5.25 South Norfolk is a predominantly rural district, abutting the major urban centre of Norwich. The district is bisected by a number of key strategic routes (A11, A47, A140 & A143) and rail routes to London and Cambridge. As might be expected in a rural area use of private motor vehicles is higher than average. Public transport to the main market towns and along the strategic road routes is generally good but more limited in the rural areas, as evidenced in the statistics below.

Table 5.7 – Demographic: Transport

Modes of Travel to Work (%) South Norfolk East of England

England

Car or van 50.4% 44.8% 40.2%

Motor cycle / scooter 0.7% 0.5% 0.5%

Public transport 4.2% 8.4% 11.3%

On foot/cycle/other 7.2% 9.6% 9.2%

Works at or mainly from home 5.0% 3.8% 3.5%

(Source: National Statistics from 2011 Census)

Travel less than 2 km to work 18.8% 21.7% 19.9%

Travel 2 – 20 km to work 45.5% 48.3% 53.8%

Travel more than 20 km to work

12.9% 14.3% 12.7%

(Source: National Statistics from 2001 Census)

5.26 Living in a rural area can increase the degree of isolation, resulting in poor access to facilities and create a dependence upon private motor transport. The problem of accessing key services is illustrated in the following table.

42

Table 5.8 – Demographic: Travel

Access to GP Services South Norfolk

East of England

England

% households within 15 mins walk/public transport

65.6% 83.4% 89.3%

% households within 15 mins by cycle 65.8% 88.8% 93.7%

% households within 15 mins by car 100% 100% 99.99

% households within 30 mins walk/public transport

94.3% 96.4% 98.8%

% households within 30 mins by cycle 96.7% 95.9% 99.1%

% households within 30 mins by car 100% 100% 100%

(Source: Norfolk Insight – 2008 Data)

5.27 Transport improvements for the area are set out in Norfolk County Council’s Local Transport Plan and the Norwich Area Transportation Strategy.

Norfolk Local Transport Plan: http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=3361

Norwich Area Transportation Strategy: http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=3682

5.28 South Norfolk also has a number of long distance footpaths and an

extensive network of public footpaths and bridleways. Enhancements of these are identified in the Green Infrastructure Strategy and Delivery Plan.

Evolution of the Baseline 5.29 The following are examples of broad sustainability issues that are likely

to be faced in Long Stratton and South Norfolk in the future under a ‘business as usual’ scenario’ (source: paragraphs 3.5.2-3.5.3 of the Joint Core Strategy SA for the Broadland part of the Norwich Policy Area, URS, December 2012, with appropriate South Norfolk/Long Stratton amendments):

An aging population will create a need for additional healthcare provision and for different types of housing.

A rising population may increase demand for jobs, housing, and services, and could place additional pressure on transport infrastructure.

http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/consumption/idcplg?IdcService=SS_GET_PAGE&nodeId=3361




43

Development will put pressure on South Norfolk’s green and historic spaces.

Climatic change may have wide ranging and unpredictable impacts, socially, economically and environmentally.

Biodiversity loss as a result of numerous drivers, including the impacts of development, may lead to a decline in ecosystem services.

A failure to fully recover from the recent recession may make economic growth difficult, leading to related problems, such as higher unemployment, deprivation and crime.

5.30 The following points reflect the likely influence of the adopted parts of the

Joint Core Strategy (JCS) for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk looking into the future, assuming that the adopted JCS is fully implemented. Adjusted for South Norfolk and Long Stratton, these points are:

Developments in South Norfolk will reach increasingly high standards of design. All new developments will have been designed and located with local distinctiveness, resource efficiency and reductions in greenhouse gas emissions in mind. They will make maximum use of decentralised and renewable or low carbon energy sources, sustainable construction technologies and will be increasingly adapted to the changing climate.

The number of homes in South Norfolk will rise as a result of increased allocations, with a mix required to provide balanced communities. Communities in South Norfolk will benefit from increased quality of life, through efforts to encourage cohesion, tackle levels of social deprivation and provide access to services.

The economy of South Norfolk will continue to develop in rural and urban locations, in order to meet the needs of a growing population. There will be a growth in the number of jobs available, including a higher proportion of jobs in higher value, knowledge economy jobs.

The transport system in South Norfolk will be further developed, with Norwich featuring as an increasingly important transport hub in the region. Private cars will remain important, but improvements in sustainable transport options and accessibility, and improved IT links, will begin to offer more sustainable transport patterns.

South Norfolk will have maintained its existing cultural assets and will have the seen development of new or improved facilities. Developments will be increasingly within reach of opportunities for cultural and leisure activities, including access to green space.

Major growth and development will take place in the South Norfolk part of the Norwich Policy Area (NPA), including increased housing, transport infrastructure and employment development. There will be

44

major new or expanded communities in the NPA, built to high design standards and addressing prior deficiencies and services and infrastructure.

In the suburban area and fringe parishes of Norwich within South Norfolk, green infrastructure will have been protected, maintained and enhanced.

The three main towns in South Norfolk will accommodate increasing amounts of housing, town centre uses, employment and services. Residential development will occur in and around five Key Service Centre settlements, with existing retail and service areas having been protected and enhanced where appropriate.

Small scale housing development will take place in a number of Service Villages in South Norfolk, with small scale employment and service taking place development in conjunction. A range of other villages will be increasingly developed within fixed boundaries through infill, small groups of dwellings and small scale business or services.

5.31 In conclusion, the strategic framework for development within South

Norfolk is set in the adopted Joint Core Strategy. Even in the absence of the Long Stratton AAP, development is likely to continue in similar vein, with Long Stratton continuing to be a likely focus for growth. One factor which may alter this dynamic slightly would be if South Norfolk does not have a five-year supply of deliverable housing sites. In such a scenario, it may be that additional planning permissions are granted which could mean Long Stratton receiving substantially more than the minimum number of dwellings allocated to it in the JCS, with acknowledged harm (e.g. to landscape) being insufficient to justify a refusal of planning permission unless the harm “significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits” (paragraph 14, NPPF).

45

6. Task A3 – Sustainability Issues 6.1 The identification of key sustainability issues presents an opportunity to address these through policies within the Local Plan

document. This approach is supported by Annex I of the SEA directive. This section outlines the key sustainability issues within South Norfolk, and how these have been incorporated into the Sustainability Appraisal objectives. This section has been informed by:

The review of other relevant plans and programmes.

The results of previous consultations.

Other issues brought to the attention of planners through on-going public engagement as part of the Local Plan process.

Table 3.1 – Key Sustainability Issues

SEA Directive Topic Key Sustainability Issues for South Norfolk

ENVIRONMENT

Biodiversity, Fauna and Flora Water and Soil / Land Cultural Heritage and Landscape

Natural environment:

There is a wealth of natural assets and ecology (including high levels of water quality), that needs protecting, maintaining and enhancing, and re-creating where possible.

There is a wealth of high quality agricultural land, which makes South Norfolk an important agricultural producer. This resource needs protecting, as its loss would be irreversible.

Improving sustainable access to the countryside.

Making the Market Towns and villages greener and with increased links to & from the urban fringe around Norwich. This may require some retrofitting of existing areas if genuinely sustainable and accessible settlements are to be achieved.

Green spaces and green corridors will need to be integrated into development, and include the use of walking and cycling networks.

There is a generally poor status of SSSIs, particularly water based ones. Overall, the quality of habitats needs to be improved and extended.

Pressures from new development and the relative lack of brownfield land in the district means that a significant area of greenfield land will be needed.

Landscape character & heritage should be retained, reflected & enhanced in development

46


designs.

Cross-boundary effects are also an important consideration. Activity promoted through the Site Specifics could impact on areas outside of South Norfolk e.g. the Broads & Norwich City.

Water quality and biodiversity (particularly the River Wensum and downstream in The Broads) will be particularly vulnerable to changes from new development. Water quality will need to be preserved and enhanced through land use practices, use of SuDS and improvements to treatment works.

Cultural Heritage and Landscape The Urban Environment

Built environment:

South Norfolk has a wealth of Scheduled Monuments, Listed Buildings and other architecturally distinctive structures all of which need protection.

The special historic character of South Norfolk, its Market Towns and hinterland should be preserved and enhanced; the high number of medieval churches, listed buildings and conservation areas are all significant contributors to the unique character and heritage of the area.

Preserve the distinctive character of the historic built environment (e.g. Venta Icenorum) and landscape, protecting and enhancing these and using them to promote the South Norfolk area.

New developments will need to be integrated into the existing form and character of local areas in order to minimise the negative impacts that could be brought to the heritage of the area. Historic Landscape Characterisations can provide valuable assistance for integrating landscape distinctiveness into new developments.

Brownfield land is in increasingly short supply, particularly in rural areas, so there is pressure to make best use of sites that do exist.

New construction can have negative impacts on existing development and townscape from noise, air quality and dust.

Indirect impacts on the built environment could arise from the additional pressures of development and climate change.

Measures should be taken to enhance the historic core of Market Towns, villages and other distinctive heritage features, by either avoiding or making them able to withstand development pressures arising in the immediate future, such as traffic growth.

47


Biodiversity, Fauna and Flora Water and Soil / Land Natural Resources and Climate The Global Environment and Local Resources The Urban Environment

Climate change:

Climate change threatens the long-term future of some habitats and species; their capacity to withstand these changes must be improved.

Many areas at risk of flooding, that will increase with climate change.

Flood risk in areas like the Broads can be exacerbated by developments upstream causing a change to natural watercourses & the water cycle.

There is a need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and ensure that contributions to climate change are reduced throughout, particularly as the rural areas of South Norfolk are so much more reliant on private car use.

All new, and some existing, developments will need to adapt to the likely consequences of climate change through their design and locations.

Norfolk is one of the driest parts of the country so adapting to the effects of climate change, including the ability to design developments that are water efficient and recycle water resources is important.

Retrofitting existing development, such as improving energy efficiency in private sector housing, tackling traffic congestion and promoting reduction, reuse and recycling of waste as help reduce emissions.

Renewable energy solutions for the area will be essential and should be sought for energy generation. This would also have the benefit of opening a number of new opportunities for economic development.

Norfolk’s carbon footprint is currently unsustainable, and promoting adaptive lifestyles will be necessary to reduce them.

New developments in all sectors, land uses and activities will need to minimise their carbon emissions.

Natural Resources and Climate Water and Soil / Land

Natural resources

There is increasing pressure on the natural resources needed to facilitate new development, which will impact on water quality and supply, air quality, energy and minerals use.

Water quality must be enhanced given the rise in phosphate levels that are occurring in water

48


Air The Global Environment and Local Resources

courses (in order to comply with WFD standards).

The irrevocable loss of quality soil resources should be minimised.

Water supplies must be able to sufficiently service new developments which should be designed to conserve water as much as possible in order to reduce the water use throughout the area. Potential impact on catchment reserves should also be considered.

Minerals efficiency will need to be improved to minimise the environmental impact of extraction and processing, including increasing the use of aggregate captured from recycled construction material.

Ensuring that existing and new development is resource efficient.

There is a need to reduce the amount of waste from South Norfolk sent to landfill sites, and find alternative methods of disposal.

Waste management will experience increased pressure on services to accommodate growth, supply new treatment facilities and minimise waste production overall.

Efforts should be made to prioritise, treat and use contaminated land for restoration, provided it’s re-use won’t present health risks.

Air Natural Resources and Climate Population and Human Health The Urban Environment

Transport

High motor vehicle use, particularly in rural areas, arising from general dependency on private car.

Use of transport, particularly in urban areas & towns, its growth in volume has impacts on human health through contributing to poorer air quality.

There is an ongoing and urgent need to encourage a modal shift in transport use away from private cars and into public transport, and to replace CO2 emitting modes with less polluting forms of transport.

General environmental amenity will be put under pressure from new development, particularly due to noise, air and water pollution.

Transport movements associated with minerals, waste and other service provision will need to be minimised.

SOCIAL

Population and Human Population

49


Health The Global Environment and Local Resources Natural Resources and Climate

Rising population through inward migration will require more homes, services and facilities.

Increased life expectancy, greater proportion of population classified as ‘elderly’, impact upon services, healthcare & accommodation.

Creation of unbalanced communities through: o Increasingly ageing population in rural areas; o Increasingly younger population in the city; and, o Migration of families from cities towards the suburban & rural areas.

Household sizes are becoming smaller as more people remain single for longer or become single & thus require more homes to cater for this trend.

In-migration of populations from other areas in the region, and nationally and internationally, is increasing the demand for housing, community facilities and services.

The proportion of the population for whom English is their second language is increasing. This is likely to have implications for the future provision of services and facilities such as education and community learning.

Reducing the environmental impact of individuals will be important in maintaining sustainable communities.

Population and Human Health

Deprivation

Deprivation affects certain sectors of the community in many different ways, including distinct variations between urban and rural areas.

Deprivation is generally heightened in urban areas, but in South Norfolk also affects significant pockets of rural communities.

Reducing deprivation includes: o Education and attainment o Income deprivation o Health and environmental quality o Crime o Social exclusion

Reducing levels of unemployment will help reduce poverty and inequality and improve home

50


affordability.

If the house price – income ratio continues to widen, home owners will have less disposable income as mortgages/rents increase.

Population and Human Health The Urban Environment

Access to services

Population dispersal has a distinct urban (primarily Norwich), rural and urban-fringe split, which has implications for accessing facilities, providing services for dispersed communities, and identifying a role for some settlements.

Pressing need to find the best location for new development to have access to services and facilities.

Services must be provided for an increasingly aging population, and all services must take into account the rising levels of disability in the population. This includes building homes to lifetime homes standards as well as providing specialised accommodation.

Access to higher education establishments is problematic for pupils in the more rural areas where public transport links are poor. Difficulties in accessibility should not be allowed to restrict training opportunities, as this would have economic impacts for the future.

As the population is rather dispersed, the roles of Market Towns and local settlements will be important in order to cater for people’s needs.


Health

The need to promote healthy lifestyles, particularly through the design of, and access to, new developments.

More health infrastructure, and better access to health facilities for all communities.

Addressing the links between lower levels of health and higher deprivation will help to reduce social inequalities.

Air Quality Management Areas should be mitigated and the impacts of congestion and localised emissions concentrations should be reduced through traffic management schemes.

Traffic can have negative health impacts across the area and these should be mitigated against.

Providing permanent sites for Gypsy and traveller groups will lead to better access to health care facilities and education.

51


Localised health facilities, such as cottage hospitals, could be more viable and provide an essential service to new growth, particularly in the rural areas, to relieve pressure on the major hospitals.


Crime

Some higher crime levels exist in the market towns, particularly in the more deprived wards.

Improving community identity and welfare will be needed to help to reduce anti-social behaviour and increase the feel of local ownership of an area.

Reducing anti-social behaviour

Building-up community cohesion will increase the viability of local community-based events and facilities, and improve local democracy and public participation in local elections and Parish planning.


Leisure, culture and recreation

Need to provide access to a good range of cultural and leisure facilities, including improved access to the countryside and local green spaces.

Facilities for local play and interaction are needed to help build strong communities.

Access to cultural activity is very important for recreation and personal development and community integration. Adequate cultural provision, such as libraries, will be integral to sustainable communities and need to be planned for from the outset.

Lifelong learning can also utilise cultural facilities and provision of community centres where community capacity and neighbourhood identity can be promoted.

An emphasis on good design of new facilities will ensure that communities can benefit from improves standards and it will bring some more ‘identity’ and community involvement in the area.

Tourism can play an important part in building-up cultural awareness and also for providing jobs and business growth. Support should be given to local tourism-related development linking cultural, social and economic aspects.

Town and village centres should be retained and encouraged as a focus point or a hub of community activity, particularly in response to local services and facilities being amalgamated or withdrawn from villages into larger settlements, affecting the viability of communities.

52



Education

There are varying levels of attainment across the area; generally lower levels are experienced in the main urban areas and amongst older people.

Ensuring the viability of educational services in rural areas will be increasingly difficult as populations in those areas become collectively older. This has implications not only for facilities provision but also for maintaining the existing high standards of educational achievement.

Opportunities for lifelong skills and training need to be encouraged in order to ‘up-skill’ the overall workforce.

Links between lower educational attainment, workplace qualifications and deprivation need to be addressed.

As in-migration rises there may be a need to improve educational opportunities within communities.


Housing

There is a variety of housing tenure across the area, with significant levels of owner-occupation.

There is a need to provide a sufficient and appropriate mix of housing types and tenures to meet the needs of all and reduce the number of household in unsuitable accommodation.

The most sustainable locations for a substantial number of new housing developments will need to be found and planned for in accordance with the Joint Core Strategy.

The need to improve the quality of new and existing housing stock.

There is concern about any further increase in the gap between house prices and income levels.

The affordability of new housing stock needs to be at a level that will ensure that local communities and key workers can access their local housing markets.

The potential for providing new affordable homes must be maximised in each development proposal.

Gypsies and Travellers should also benefit from provision of sites in South Norfolk.

More effective use of the existing housing stock, such as returning vacant homes to beneficial use, could increase access to housing.

Population and Human Transport and accessibility

53


Health Improving access to jobs, services and facilities by public transport and reducing the need to travel by private car.

Providing appropriate transport infrastructure.

Improving the accessibility to services and facilities for those who wish to walk and cycle.

There is a need to improve the opportunities to walk and cycle and use open space provisions as a means of recreation and for leading a healthier and more sustainable lifestyle.

SOCIAL

Population and Human Health The Global Environment and Local Resources

Growth

There is a generally diverse, successful and growing economy, with strong Research and Development and specialist engineering industries.

Whilst the main focus of employment provision is within Norwich, South Norfolk has a number of smaller, but significant, employment growth areas that are expected to expand further.

Currently, across the Joint Core Strategy area, there is an emphasis towards large employers being located in the City, and small employers in Broadland and South Norfolk. This may suggest a need to improve diversity of employers across the economy.

Maintain high levels of employment & improve the ability of local populations & those with fewer qualifications to access employment markets.

Where agricultural viability declines, diversification and indigenous investment needs support in rural economies.

Locating employment growth and allocations for new jobs, must be in the most sustainable locations and will be a key factor for a prosperous economy.

Development of the evening economy can bring increased diversity for business in some areas.

Increasing the provision of jobs in local areas will increase local economic growth and prosperity, so local jobs provision should be encouraged that can also offer vocational training opportunities.

Diversification and extension of the tourism base across the area. Promotion of tourism development whilst protecting the important landscapes, environment and

cultural heritage of South Norfolk.

Natural Resources Resources

54


and Climate The Global Environment and Local Resources

Domestic and business waste management, including waste minimisation, increased recycling and resource efficiency improvements, such as energy generation and recovery.

Maximising opportunities for economic growth and employment through new waste management facilities.

Promotion of sustainable energy technologies.

Enabling sustainable production and consumption.

Agriculture provides a significant resource for the South Norfolk economy and its ability to compete in the national and regional sector needs to be supported.

An environmentally sustainable economy can be developed through a general reduction in food and business mile generation, improved energy savings, development of the renewable energy sector, and through enterprises such as eco-tourism.


Skills

Promoting the knowledge economy will be a key influence in the growth of South Norfolk and will require support through business infrastructure and training opportunities.

There is an unbalanced workforce, as graduates take up intermediate jobs and so present difficulties for those with lower qualifications to access jobs.

Improving levels of educational attainment amongst school-leavers will be a vital part of improving the skills and training of the South Norfolk workforce.

The knowledge economy needs to be able to develop an environmentally friendly sector that helps provide localised training.


Transport Infrastructure

Access to jobs needs to be improved, particularly for those in rural areas where local employment opportunities may not be so readily available.

Providing job opportunities closer to centres of population, particularly in the rural areas, will be important in reducing the dependency on the private car, reducing the need to travel, and building community cohesion.

Links to regional, national and international transport networks should be maximised for their ability to bring growth and investment.

55

7. Task A4 – Developing the Sustainability Appraisal Framework

7.1 A Sustainability Appraisal (SA) Framework was developed having

regard to the issues and objectives identified in the review of the relevant plans, programmes and policies and from issues and problems identified in the baseline. The draft SA Framework was subject to consultation as part of the SA Scoping Report in 2010 (see Task A5 below). It has been used as a basis for all four emerging South Norfolk Local Plan Documents.

8. Task A5 – Consulting on the Scope of the Sustainability Appraisal

8.1 A Sustainability Appraisal (SA) Scoping Report was prepared in summer

2010 to cover all the South Norfolk Local Plan Documents together (the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, the Long Stratton AAP, Wymondham AAP and the Development Management Policies Document).

8.2 The SA Scoping Report includes a review of all relevant plans,

programmes and policies (updated in this draft SA), provides a baseline for key environmental, social and economic data and identifies issues and problems which need to be addressed through the South Norfolk Local Plan Documents. The scoping report also provides a framework and set of objectives for the assessment of policies and proposals.

8.3 The SA Scoping Report was consulted upon widely with both statutory

consultees and a number of other organisations. The consultation provided useful feedback on the key environmental, economic and social factors which have helped to shape the development of the various South Norfolk Local Plan Documents. Consultation comments were carefully considered and as a result some minor amendments were made to the SA framework and objectives. The 22 objectives that make up the SA Framework are shown in Table 9.1 below.

8.4 A full list of the consultation comments regarding the SA (and the

Council’s responses to them) can be found in Appendix 3.

56

9. Task B1 – Testing the Long Stratton Area Action Plan Objectives against the Sustainability Appraisal Framework

9.1 For the purposes of the Long Stratton (AAP) and particularly the

assessment of sites it was considered that not all of the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) objectives were directly relevant. Therefore some objectives were scoped out as shown (with reasons) by the lighter text in Table 9.1 below.

Table 9.1 – Environmental, Social & Economic Objectives

Environmental Objectives Reason for scoping out



ENV 3 To maximise the use of renewable energy solutions and reduce contributions to climate change







Not considered to have a direct impact on site assessment. Where relevant, waste production would be a consideration at the planning application stage within the context of Joint Core Strategy Policy 1

Social Objectives



S 3 To offer opportunities for all sections of the

57

population to have rewarding and satisfying employment



Not considered to have a direct impact on site selection. These aspects are covered by the range of services referred to in Objective S 4




Economic Objectives






9.2 The Long Stratton AAP is based around a set of objectives. The

objectives for the AAP have been based on policies in the JCS, government guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework and results of the ‘Long Stratton 2026’ public consultation that took place in early 2011. The objectives were amended slightly to reflect comments made to the 2013 Preferred Options consultation. The Long Stratton AAP objectives are shown in Table 9.2 below:

Table 9.2: Long Stratton Area Action Plan objectives

Housing A minimum of 1,800 new houses will be built in locations which support the form and function of the village and deliver a bypass. The bypass will be completed before 250 of the new homes are built and occupied. The new housing will meet the highest standards of design, energy and water efficiency and affordability whilst recognising the need to sustain and improve the distinctive character of Long Stratton and its surroundings. The necessary infrastructure, including social and community facilities, and public open space will be provided to support new development. Good walking and cycling routes will link the new housing to the town centre.

Employment Provision will be made to support a mix of local job opportunities and economic growth in Long Stratton including

58

further opportunities for small businesses, and new commercial development relating to the enhanced town centre.

Environment New development will respect the local landscape character especially to the east of the existing village. This will also contribute to the surrounding green infrastructure network which will protect and enhance the biodiversity of the area. Within the new development ‘greens and commons’ will be created to provide open space which will replicate the local historic landscape features and help create locally distinctive neighbourhoods. The environment of the town centre will be significantly improved through measures to capture the benefits of the bypass removing through traffic to provide a safe and inviting location, more attractive for shopping and services and to provide an enhanced setting for the heritage assets in the Conservation Area.

Recreation The health, wellbeing and quality of life of local residents will be improved and the sense of community that already exists within the village will be maintained and enhanced by protecting existing public open space and providing new recreation and community facilities to support existing and new development. Walking and cycling routes within the new developments will link with existing networks and provide access to both the town centre and surrounding countryside.

Town Centre The town centre will be revitalised following the removal of heavy lorries and other traffic through the delivery of a new bypass. The historic streetscape of the Conservation Area will be enhanced and a safer and more attractive environment will be created with potential to provide a new ‘market place’ to act as a focal point. The improved centre will enable the reuse of vacant buildings be brought back into use and additional retail provision will be made which is well related to the existing centre.

Accessibility Transport improvements including bus priority routes at the A140/A47 junction and an enhanced route to the city centre will be provided. The use of public transport will be maximised and safe and direct pedestrian and cycle routes will be provided to link existing and new development to town centre and local employment locations in Long Stratton. Bus waiting facilities will be improved.

9.3 The Long Stratton AAP objectives were tested against the remaining SA

Framework objectives (as shown in Table 9.3 below) to show their compatibility and any potential for conflict. Any conflicting issues will be addressed further in the SA.

9.4 Table 9.3 shows that there is generally a high level of compatibility

between the Long Stratton AAP objectives and the SA Framework objectives. Most of the AAP objectives have a neutral or positive effect on meeting the SA Framework objectives. The few potential conflicts

59

are between the environmental objectives in the SA Framework and the requirement to allocate land for new housing and employment development. Whilst these conflicts cannot be completely reconciled – the scale of new development allocated in the JCS necessitates greenfield developments in Long Stratton - these conflicts could be partly mitigated by the appropriate location of development sites and the application of suitable mitigation measures. The potential conflicts are described in more detail in Table 9.4.

Table 9.3: Compatibility of the Long Stratton AAP objectives with the SA Framework objectives (Red = potential conflict; amber = potential neutrality; green = potential compatibility)

Long Stratton AAP Objectives

SA Objectives Housing Employment Environment Recreation

Town Centre Accessibility

ENV1 r r g g a a

ENV2 r r g a a a

ENV3 g r a a a g

ENV4 g g g g g g

ENV5 r r g g g g

ENV6 g r g g g a

ENV7 r r g a a a

ENV8 r r a a a a

S1 g a a a a a

S2 g g a a a a

S3

S4 g g g g g g

S6

S7 g a a g g a

S8 g g g g g g

EC1 a g a a g g

EC2 a g a a g a

EC3 g g a a g g

EC4

EC5 a g a a a g

Table 9.4: Potential conflicts between the SA Framework objectives and the Long Stratton AAP objectives

SA Objective Potentially conflicting Long Stratton AAP objective

The potential conflict

ENV 1 Housing Employment

Potential conflict exists between the need to allocate land for housing and employment development and the SA objective to protect biodiversity, geodiversity and habitat protection. This requires the assessment of sites to ensure that nil or minimum conflict occurs.

ENV 2 Housing Potential conflict exists between

60

Employment the allocation of development land for housing and employment and the SA objective to minimise flood risk. This requires the appropriate assessment of sites to ensure that nil or minimum conflict occurs.

ENV 3 Employment Potential conflict exists between the allocation of development land for employment and the SA objective to reduce contributions to climate change. The development of land for housing does not have the same potential for conflict as the housing objective states that the highest standards of design and energy efficiency will be sought.


Potential conflict exists between the allocation of development land for housing and employment and the SA objective to improve air quality minimise noise, vibration and light pollution. This requires the assessment of sites to ensure that nil or minimum conflict occurs.

ENV 6 Employment Potential conflict exists between allocation of employment land and the SA objective to maintain and enhance local distinctiveness and quality of landscapes, townscapes and the historic environment. The closest potential development sites to services may be precluded by adverse impacts on townscapes and historic environments depending on the use proposed and the context for their location. The development of land for housing does not have the same potential for conflict as the housing objective states that development will need to sustain and improve the distinctive character of Long Stratton.


Potential conflict exists between the SA objective to minimise the loss of undeveloped land and conserve and improve the quality of soil resources due to the relative lack of brownfield sites in the District. This applies in particular to proposed major housing growth areas that cannot be

61

accommodated within existing settlements.


Potential conflict exists between the need to allocate land for the development of housing and employment with the SA objective to improve water quality and sustainable sources of supply. Adverse impacts could be caused by surface water run-off from new development unless mitigated by suitable drainage systems. This also requires the assessment of sites to ensure that nil or minimum conflict occurs with sites of nature conservation interest or biodiversity importance where water forms an important element.

62

10. Task B2 – Developing the Alternative Options Introduction 10.1 Policy 9 of the adopted Joint Core Strategy (JCS) allocates a minimum

of 1800 new dwellings for Long Stratton. The base date of the JCS is 31 March 2008 and plan runs until to 2026. Policy 9 also contains several other elements of direct relevance to Long Stratton

Junction improvements on the A47 Norwich Southern Bypass are also identified as being essential, including the Thickthorn junction, which may have impacts for development in Long Stratton;

A long Stratton bypass;

New employment development to serve local needs of major growth locations of which Long Stratton is included; and

Opportunities to enhance green infrastructure throughout the area will be sought, with particular emphasis on priority areas.

10.2 JCS Policy 10 contains a more detailed breakdown of the requirements

and constraints to growth in Long Stratton. The policy states that the major growth in this location is dependent on the delivery of a Long Stratton bypass, and will include:

At least 1,800 dwellings, the full level and phasing of growth at this location is dependent on overcoming sewerage constraints;

Improvements to the town centre including traffic management , environmental enhancement and expanded facilities;

Secondary school provision will be provided in, or by the expansion of, the existing school;

Investment in strategic infrastructure corridor reflecting and conserving the historic landscape to the east of the village;

Transport improvements including bus priority at the A140/A47 junction and enhanced route to the city centre;

Safe and direct cycle and pedestrian access to the town centre and employment locations; and

Additional local employment opportunities. 10.3 The JCS states that detailed proposals for Long Stratton will be

developed through the preparation of an Area Action Plan AAP. 10.4 The JCS therefore clearly identifies four major constraints affecting the

location and quantum of growth in Long Stratton;

The need to deliver a bypass for Long Stratton;

The need to overcome existing sewerage constraints;

The need to resolve secondary education provision; and

The need to maintain and conserve the historic landscape of the east of the village.

63

10.5 For the purposes of the Long Stratton AAP, Task B2 can be split into

two distinct sections:

1. Assessing the sites proposed for development (following the same process that was used to assess sites for the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document) to enable broad options for the location and level of growth in Long Stratton to be developed and evaluated leading to the allocation of development sites; and

2. Developing additional policies and proposals specific to the AAP, presenting alternative options where appropriate, leading to final policy wordings.

Public Consultation on the Long Stratton Area Action Plan 10.6 There have been a number of public consultation stages in the

development of the Long Stratton AAP, which have informed the development of the overall objectives as well as the allocation of sites, the identification of broad options for growth and other more specific policies and proposals. To begin with the Long Stratton AAP was consulted on together with the Site Specific Allocations and Policies document until 2011 when the first separate Long Stratton AAP consultation was undertaken in 2013.

Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document (including the Long Stratton Area Action Plan) – Issues and Options Consultation Autumn 2010 10.7 The Council put out an initial ‘call for sites’ in 2005 and this resulted in

various potential development sites being suggested across the South Norfolk district, including in Long Stratton. The Council consulted on some 1,500 sites across the district between 1 September and 19 November 2010 (including 20 in Long Stratton). A further 147 potential Long Stratton sites were proposed during this consultation period (3 in Long Stratton). This consultation was accompanied by consultation on the Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report (Task A work). No assessment of the merits (or otherwise) of the sites were made at this stage by the Council – representations were sought simply on the basis of the plans of the sites submitted. The 2010 consultation also asked for comments on a site checklist which would later form the basis for the site assessment process.

Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document (including Long Stratton Area Action Plan) – Second Issues and Options Autumn 2011 10.8 In August 2011, a further round of public consultation took place on the

new potential sites suggested during the last round of public consultation, including the 3 sites in Long Stratton. Further or new representations on the original Long Stratton sites were also invited. Again no assessment of the merits (or otherwise) of the sites were made by the Council at this stage. The 2011 consultation produced a further 2 submitted sites in Long Stratton (these sites were given an ‘R’ prefix). This gave a total of 25 sites to be taken through the detailed SA site assessment process, which is detailed below.

64

Long Stratton 2026 – Preparing and Action Plan – August – November 2011 10.9 The Council first consulted the people of Long Stratton between 29

August and 18 November 2011. The aim of the public consultation was to gather people’s views about future development in the town. A leaflet and survey called ‘Long Stratton 2026 preparing for an Action Plan’ were sent to all homes and businesses in the parish of Long Stratton. The Council also wrote to a large number of other people including relevant service and utility providers, regulatory and amenity bodies, town and parish councils and other statutory consultees. This consultation was high level and was not accompanied by a Sustainability Appraisal. However the Council did ask questions about broad locations for housing and employment growth at this stage, which helped to develop the options assessed in the Sustainability Appraisal Report.

Long Stratton Area Action Plan – Preferred Options Consultation – May – July 2013 10.10 The Preferred Options consultation document outlined the sites that the

Council intended to allocate for housing and employment, as well a number of other specific policies and proposals for Long Stratton. To inform the allocation of land for development in the Preferred Options version of the AAP the Council undertook a detailed assessment of all 25 sites put forward for development in Long Stratton and used this information together with public comments from the ‘Long Stratton 2026’ consultation, the objectives of the Long Stratton AAP and the key sustainability issues identified in the SA Scoping Report to develop a number of broad distribution options for housing and employment growth. This process was outlined in an interim SA Report which accompanied the Preferred Options consultation.

Assessing the sites proposed for development and identifying broad options for the location and level of growth leading to the allocation of sites in the AAP 10.11 The allocation of sites in the Long Stratton AAP was considered at two

levels. Firstly, each site was assessed on its own merits through a detailed Site Assessment process. This enabled any sites with very significant constraints affecting their deliverability to be effectively discounted for consideration at an early stage irrespective of any other merits. It also allowed the relative merits and constraints of the remaining sites to be compared. The second level of assessment undertaken was the consideration of a number of broad distribution options for new housing and employment land in Long Stratton to meet the requirements of the JCS.

Developing Options for the Long Stratton Area Action Plan - Assessing each site individually 10.12 An initial sieve of all the sites suggested in Long Stratton was

undertaken following the two district wide public consultations in 2010 and 2011 to determine whether they conformed to the settlement hierarchy in the Joint Core Strategy (JCS). Long Stratton is classified in the JCS as a ‘major growth location’ and a ‘main town’ so all proposed sites in the Long Stratton area were automatically taken through the site

65

assessment process. However, housing and employment areas of Long Stratton already extend into Tharston and Hapton Parish. The settlements of Tharston and Hapton are classified elsewhere in the JCS Settlement Hierarchy, such as Smaller Rural Communities. These settlements are outside the scope of the AAP and sites here were considered under the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document. Consequently, only the parts of Tharston and Hapton that are closer to Long Stratton are included in the AAP. This fact helped to define the area to be covered by the AAP and only sites that could be considered within the AAP area were considered within the AAP context.

10.13 All the sites suggested in the Long Stratton AAP area were then subject

to rigorous assessment against a detailed site checklist. The site assessment criteria had been developed and refined through district wide public consultation in 2010 and were also used to assess sites across the district as part of the Site Specific Allocations and Polices Document. See Appendix 4 for the consultation comments made in relation to the site assessment criteria and the Council’s responses to those comments. The checklist included 39 different criteria grouped under a number of main headings. The site assessment process also took into account comments received through the 2010 and 2011 consultations from both statutory consultees and the public.

The Sustainability Appraisal Objectives and Site Assessment Criteria

10.14 The process of assessing sites has been informed by and tested against the SA Framework and vice versa to increase the robustness of the site selection process. To ensure that the assessment of sites was robust an SA of the site assessment criteria was undertaken and is shown in Appendix 5 (Table 10.1 below details how the criteria in the checklist relate to the SA objectives).

66

Table 10.1 Relationship between the scoped SA Objectives and the

site assessment criteria.

SA Objectives Site assessment criteria

Environmental Objectives

ENV 1 To maintain and enhance biodiversity, geodiversity, species and habitat quality and avoid habitat fragmentation.

Ecology/ Biodiversity

Tree Preservation Orders

Ancient woodland

Protected hedgerows

Sites of Special Scientific Interest inc. Ramsar sites

County Wildlife Sites

Special Areas of Conservation

Special Protection Areas Undeveloped Land

Brownfield/Greenfield

Agricultural Land Grades 1 and 2

(Plus notes made of green infrastructure corridors, biodiversity action plan areas, geodiversity action plan areas)

ENV 2 To limit or reduce vulnerability to climate change, including minimising the risks of flooding.

Flood Risk

Flood Risk Zones 3 (Zones 3a/3b where known), 2 and 1

Utilities

ENV 3 To maximise the use of renewable energy solutions and reduce contributions to climate change.

Location principles

JCS Settlement Hierarchy

Settlement boundary

ENV 4 To reduce the effect of traffic on the environment.

Location principles


Settlement boundary Other criteria

Current land use

Public transport access

Protected rail routes (from Existing Land Use policy)

Protected cycle routes also noted but not ranked

Public rights of way noted

ENV 5 To improve air quality and minimise noise, vibration and light pollution.

Location principles


Settlement boundary Other Criteria


Protected cycle routes also noted but not ranked

Surrounding land uses noted on site visits

Other material considerations;

Sewage Treatment Works

67

safeguarding area

ENV 6 To maintain and enhance the distinctiveness and quality of landscapes, townscapes and the historic environment.

Location principles


Settlement boundary Landscape/ townscape/ historic environment designations

Historic park/ garden

Notes made of landscape character areas

Listed buildings

Conservation areas

Scheduled ancient monument

Site of archaeological interest (NHER)

Existing Land Use Policy

Existing land use allocations

Planning histories also noted

Areas of open land (SNLP Policy ENV 2)

River valleys (SNLP Policy ENV 3)

Norwich Southern Bypass landscape protection Zone (SNLP Policy ENV 6)

Important spaces (SNLP Policy IMP 3)

Undeveloped land

Brownfield/ Greenfield Other Criteria

Current land use

ENV 7 To minimise the loss of undeveloped land and conserve and improve the quality of soil resources.

Location principles


Settlement boundary Undeveloped Land

Brownfield/Greenfield

Agricultural land Grades 1 and 2

Existing Land Use policy



Areas of open land (SNLP Policy ENV 2)

River valleys (SNLP Policy ENV 3)

Norwich Southern Bypass landscape protection Zone (SNLP Policy ENV 6)

Important spaces (SNLP Policy IMP 3)

Other Criteria

Current Land Use

68

Other Material Considerations

Sites on minerals resources

Minerals/Waste Safeguarding Site

ENV 8 To improve water qualities and provide for sustainable sources of supply and sustainable use.

Location principles


Settlement boundary Ecology/ Biodiversity

Sites of Special Scientific Interest inc. Ramsar sites


Special Areas of Conservation

Special Protection Areas Other Criteria

Utilities

ENV 9 To minimise the production of waste and increase recycling.

Social Objectives

S 1 To provide everybody with the opportunity to live in a decent, affordable and suitable home.

(Sites will be allocated to meet the required total housing numbers, but Joint Core Strategy Policy 4 housing delivery requirements for affordable housing will be affected by the potential viability of development on a site). Existing land use policy



Other Criteria

Current land use

Utilities Other material considerations

Site availability

Gas pipelines

Oil pipelines



Sewage Treatment Works Safeguarding Area

Article 4 Directions

Overhead cables/pylons

S 2 To reduce poverty, inequality and social exclusion.

Location principles



Services accessibility

S 3 To offer opportunities for all sections of the population to have rewarding and satisfying employment.

S 4 To improve accessibility to Location principles

69

essential services, facilities and the workplace, particularly for those most in need.


Settlement boundary Existing land use policy


Primary Shopping Area (compatibility)

Central Business Area (compatibility)

Other Criteria

Current land Use

Services Accessibility


S 5 To improve the education and skills of the population overall.

S 6 To improve the health of the population overall.

Other Criteria

Contamination/ Pollution

Hazardous Zone Other Material Considerations


S 7 To encourage local community identity and foster mixed communities with co-operative attitudes, helping to reduce anti-social activity.

Other Criteria

Services Accessibility

S 8 To improve the quality of where people live.

Landscape/ townscape/ historic environment designations


Notes made of landscape character areas

Listed buildings

Conservation areas

Scheduled ancient monument


Other Criteria

Public Transport access

Services accessibility


Hazardous Zone


Site availability


Surrounding land uses noted on site visits

Economic objectives

EC 1 To encourage sustained economic growth.

(Sites will be allocated to meet the Joint Core Strategy required employment land provisions, employment land retained within the context of JCS Policy 5 and commercial development sites

70

allocated in relation to JCS Policy 19 and the potential identified by the 2007 retail study). Location principles






Other Criteria

Current land use



Utilities

Services accessibility Other material considerations

Site availability

Gas pipelines

Oil pipelines





EC 2 To encourage and accommodate both indigenous and inward investment promoting a positive image of the district.

Location principles


Settlement boundary Existing Land Use policy

Existing land use allocations Other Criteria

Current land use


Site availability

Gas pipelines

Oil pipelines





EC 3 To encourage efficient patterns of movement in support of economic growth.

Location principles



Utilities


Protected rail routes

71

Protected cycle routes also noted

Public rights of way also noted

EC 4 To improve the social and environmental performance of the economy.

.

EC 5 To improve economic performance in rural areas.

(Sites will be allocated to meet the Joint Core Strategy required employment land provisions, employment land retained within the context of JCS Policy 5 and commercial development sites allocated in relation to JCS Policy 19 and the potential identified by the 2007 retail study). Location principles






Other Criteria

Current land use


Utilities

Contamination/ Pollution Other material considerations

Site availability

Gas pipelines

Oil pipelines




10.15 The process of assessing sites using the site assessment criteria is detailed in Table 10.2 below. To display the results of this assessment, a ‘traffic light’ site assessment table has been produced, showing major constraints (red), less serious impacts (amber) and no direct impacts (green). The completed ‘traffic light’ site assessment table for Long Stratton is shown at Appendix 6. However, this table is merely illustrative of the issues considered when assessing sites and it is important to note that the assessment of the criteria was not a simple, mechanistic, method of reaching a conclusion on the acceptability of any individual site – in other words, it was not a question of merely assessing the total of ‘green’, ‘amber’ and ‘red’ impacts and concluding that a site is acceptable if the ‘green’ totals are higher than the ‘red’ totals. It would also be over-simplistic to assume that a site with more green results would automatically be preferred over a site with several red or amber results. Professional judgment was used to assess each

72

site on its own merits, considering what mitigation would be required to make the site acceptable, and whether this mitigation would be likely to result in a viable development. Certain criteria are of more significance than others – for instance, a potential site within a Special Area of Conservation (a ‘red’) is extremely unlikely to be acceptable, whereas a listed building on the proposed site (also a ‘red’) might be able to be accommodated within an appropriate site design.

Table 10.2 – Criteria and Assessment of Site Selection Criteria

Criteria

Ranking

- (Red) - / + (Amber) + (Green) 1) Location principles

Settlement Hierarchy

Sites in Smaller Rural Communities and the Countryside

Sites within settlements suitable for development boundaries only

Sites within settlements suitable for development land allocations

Settlement Boundary

Sites located further than 400m from an existing defined development boundary.

Sites not adjacent to but within 400m of an existing defined development boundary

Sites within or adjacent to an existing defined development boundary

2) Existing land use policy:


Proposal for alternative use; proposed mixed use includes existing allocated use

Proposal consistent with existing allocation

Primary Shopping Area

Proposed use incompatible

Proposed use compatible

Central Business Area

Proposed use incompatible

Proposed use compatible

Area of open land (SNLP ENV2)

Proposed site within Proposed site outside

River valleys (SNLP ENV3)


Norwich Southern Bypass Landscape Protection Zone (SNLP ENV6)


Important spaces (SNLP IMP3)


Protected rail routes (SNLP TRA 6)

Crosses or adjacent to site

None present

Planning histories

Noted as part of site assessment: Not ranked but extant planning permission given positive discrimination in relation to proposed use

3) Undeveloped land:

Brownfield/ Greenfield

Site predominantly greenfield

Site predominantly brownfield

73

Agricultural land Grades 1 and 2

Grades 1 and 2 Grade 3

4) Landscape/ Townscape/ Historic environment designations


Site in or adjacent Site elsewhere

Listed buildings On site Adjacent to site Site elsewhere

Conservation areas

Site in or adjacent Site elsewhere

Scheduled ancient monuments

On site Adjacent to site Site elsewhere


Within or adjacent to site Site elsewhere

Landscape Character Areas

Noted as part of site assessment but not ranked.

5) Current land use

Site in use and likely to continue

Site in use not known if likely to continue

Vacant site not in use

6) Ecology/ Biodiversity

Tree preservation orders

On or affected by site Not affected by site

Ancient woodland

Within site Affected by site Not affected by site

Protected hedgerows

On or affected by site Not affected by site

SSSI/ Ramsar sites

Site covers/ overlaps

Adjacent to site Site elsewhere


Site covers Adjacent to or slightly overlaps site

Site elsewhere

Special Areas of Conservation/ Special Protection Areas

Site overlaps Adjacent to site Site elsewhere

Notes also made of green infrastructure corridors and biodiversity action plan areas but not ranked.

Notes also made of geodiversity action plan areas but not ranked.

7) Contamination/ Pollution

Present or potentially present

Not present

8) Flood Risk Sites in flood zone 3

Sites in flood zone 2 Sites in flood zone 1

9) Hazardous Zone

Site within Site elsewhere

10) Public transport access

No service to market town or Norwich within 800m

Within 800m of service to market town or Norwich

Highway safety / works required

To be confirmed by Highways Authority in response to Preferred Options

74

11) Utilities None available or available with known capacity issues

All services in place with capacity for development

12) Services Access

No services from core list within 800m

1-4 services from core list within 800m

5 or more services from core list within 800m

13) Other Material Considerations

Site availability Single owner but not actively promoted; multiple ownership but unwilling partners.

Multiple ownership but issues can be resolved; minor issues that can be resolved.

Site actively promoted

Gas pipelines Crosses site None present

Oil pipelines Crosses site None present


Present on site None present

Minerals/waste safeguarding sites

Safeguarded site Sites not affected

Sewage Treatment Works safeguarding area

Sites within 400m cordon sanitaire

Sites beyond 400m cordon sanitaire

Article 4 Direction

Site affected Site not affected

Overhead cables/ pylons on site

Noted as part of site assessment but not ranked

Public rights of way


Protected cycle route


10.16 The criteria considered to be most important in determining the overall sustainability of sites were, proximity to local services (including a travel-to-work public transport service) and avoidance of areas prone to flooding (either fluvial or local surface water drainage issues). Environmental designations, existing and neighbouring land uses, settlement form and character and expert advice from statutory bodies were also key decision-making factors, for example, derelict, disused or brownfield sites were preferred where possible. Assessment of the sites identified potential impacts across a wide range of criteria and in all cases, the potential for mitigating the impact of developing such a site was considered, and the cumulative impact of all mitigation required for that site was weighed.

10.17 Representations received (from members of the public, parish councils, statutory consultees, etc) were also taken into account; however site assessment depended on evidence regarding material considerations, rather than pure opinion. For example, in many cases across the district, anecdotal claims of surface water flooding were made, but in

75

only a few cases was flood evidence submitted which affected the site assessment.

10.18 There are some white cells on the site assessment tables. In some cases these white cells indicate that the criterion did not apply at all to that site (e.g. there was no previous Local Plan allocation) and in other cases, white cells indicate that a result was not available for that criterion (e.g. for late-submitted sites). Sites submitted during the 2011 sites consultation were classed as ‘late-submitted sites’ and given a Z prefix. Z sites were assessed alongside sites submitted earlier in the process but had not been subject to public consultation in 2010 and 2011, hence the blank cells. During the site assessment process, Z sites with the potential to be allocated were submitted for comment to Anglian Water, the Minerals and Waste Authority, Education Authority and Highways Authority (and parish councils were advised) before a final decision was made on their suitability. These these Z sites became Preferred Option sites, and were subject to public consultation at Preferred Options stage of the Long Stratton AAP in 2013.

10.19 Each assessed site ends with overall comments, within which the conclusion on the acceptability (or otherwise) on the site has been reached. This balances consideration of all the criteria scores and comments received in reaching the conclusion.

Developing Options for the Long Stratton Area Action Plan - Assessing the Broad Location and Level of Growth 10.20 Because of the high level of new growth allocated to Long Stratton in

the JCS, it was considered important for the AAP to take the site assessment procedure one stage further and look at developing and evaluating alternative options to accommodate growth in the town, both for housing and employment. The second task under Stage B2 was therefore to look in some detail at the appropriate level of growth for the town and then to investigate the development of alternative options to accommodate this growth so that the effects can be predicted, evaluated and mitigated leading to preferred options for growth.

Options for the Overall Number of Dwellings to be considered for the Long Stratton Area Action Plan 10.21 Policy 9 of the JCS allocates a minimum of 1,800 dwellings to Long

Stratton, as outlined above to deliver a bypass. However, as already mentioned JCS Policy 10 also identifies a number of constraints to growth, including the need to overcome sewerage constraints, conserve the historic landscape to the east of the village and the expansion of, or provision of a new high school.

10.22 There are potential constraints to development due to the capacity of

local waste water infrastructure at the Long Stratton Water Recycling Centre, where solutions for accommodating more than 1,400 dwellings may be required. As proposed development exceeds 1,400 dwellings, upgrades and/or capacity at the Water Recycling Centre will need to be established which continue to safeguard the Broads SAC/SPA downstream and meet the requirements of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The impact of at least 1,800 new dwellings will need to be considered in combination with permitted growth, supporting

76

services (schools, community buildings etc.) and employment development. Anglian Water and the Environment Agency have advised that, provided appropriate phasing of housing is implemented along with an agreed foul water strategy which considers the phasing, management and monitoring of overall development in Long Stratton, and then this should not pose an obstacle to delivering proposed growth. This approach would ensure that dwellings would not be occupied ahead of improvements in treatment technology capabilities at the Long Stratton Water Recycling Centre and prevent deterioration in waster quality the downstream water course to meet the requirements of the WFD.

10.23 The position of education provision in Long Stratton (High School) and

Norfolk County Council Children’s Services directorate is that there is, in principle, current available space at the High School for approximately 200 children. However, as catchment numbers are due to rise, it is estimated that only approximately 60 places will be available in the school as it currently stands (350 new homes). Norfolk County Council Children’s Services directorate have confirmed that the school could be expanded to accommodate children from around 2000 new homes, although this would requires investment in the school building which would be required to increase the classroom capacity and supporting spaces.

10.24 The position of South Norfolk Council is therefore that the longer-term

(beyond 2026, and new housing levels above 1,800 new dwellings for Long Stratton) will be most appropriately explored through a wider review of the Joint Core Strategy, which will be informed by the forthcoming update of the Greater Norwich Strategic Housing Market Assessment.

10.25 In conclusion, the Council asserts that the evidence shows that there

are not any reasonable alternatives (by way of higher housing numbers) to accommodating 1,800 new dwellings in Long Stratton and therefore 1,800 will be the number of new homes allocated in the AAP.

Options for the Broad Location of Housing and Employment Growth 10.26 The Council used the results from the ‘traffic light’ Site Assessment

Tables (Appendix 6) together with public comments from the Long Stratton 2026’ consultation, the objectives of the AAP and the key sustainability issues identified in the SA Scoping Report to develop a number of broad distribution options for accommodating the 1,800 new homes (minimum) as required by the JCS.

Option 1 Locating 1,800 dwellings and the bypass to the east of the town

Option 2 Locating 1,200 dwellings and the bypass to the east of the town and 600 dwellings to the north-west

Option 3 Locating 1,000 dwellings and the bypass to the east of the town, 600 dwellings to the north-west and 200 dwellings to the south-west of the town

77

Option 4 Locating 1,800 dwellings and the bypass to the east of the town, plus 600 dwellings to the north-west of the town

10.27 The same process was undertaken to develop a number of different

scenarios for accommodating up to 12 hectares of employment land in Long Stratton. The options developed and considered were:

Option 1 Retention of the existing A140 employment allocation and expansion as part of the adjoining housing proposed east of Long Stratton

Option 2 Retention of the existing A140 employment allocation with modest expansion as part of the adjoining housing proposed east of Long Stratton, and extension of the Tharston Industrial Estate

Option 3 Retention of the existing A140 employment allocation with modest expansion as part of the adjoining housing proposed east of Long Stratton, extension of the Tharston Industrial Estate and additional employment allocation as part of the housing proposed north-west of Long Stratton

Developing additional policies and proposals specific to the AAP 10.28 The Long Stratton AAP also differs from the Site Specific Allocations

and Policies DPD in that it is more than simply an assessment of sites suggested for development. The AAP will also need to contain other policies and proposals specific to Long Stratton. Most of these policies and proposals have been included because of direct links with requirements of the JCS, as a request from a particular organisation or group within Long Stratton or reflecting current planning issues within the town. Because of their nature most of these policies and proposals do not have an alternative option but will still need to be subject to SA to identify any potential effects which may need to be mitigated. The relevant policies and proposals are:

Town centre definition policy.

Retaining and enhancing the distinctive character of the historic town centre.

Provision of Green Infrastructure policy

Protecting existing open space policy

Providing new open space and improving existing areas and

Land for new burial ground policy

Accessibility policy

Development boundary policy

78

11. Task B3 – Predicting the Effects of the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

Predicting the effects of site assessment and the development of broad options for growth 11.1 The detailed site assessment process which was undertaken (described

in Task B2) allows us to predict the effects of the AAP in relation to individual sites. The condensed site assessment table shown in Table 11.1 below and the full assessment table at Appendix 6 rates the suggested sites giving positive attributes a green rating, neutral attributes or positions where mitigation might be required an amber rating and aspects of a site that presented significant impact issues or constraints that could not be mitigated a red rating.

11.2 Other relevant site issues were noted in the conclusion of the site

assessment table but not given a traffic light rating. Despite not being given a rating they did contribute to the analysis of sites and allowed greater consideration to be given to the predicted effects of developing individual sites. These elements included surrounding land uses, information on green infrastructure corridors, biodiversity and geodiversity action plans, landscape character areas and protected cycle routes.

79

Table 11.1 – summary of the predicted effects of allocated sites

Site ID number

Assessed as Settlement Site address

suggested land use

Suggested by (Surname)

Site conforms with JCS settlement

hierarchy for consideration of housing allocation S

ett

lem

ent

Bo

un

dary

Are

a o

f O

pen

Lan

d E

NV

2

Riv

er

Valle

y E

NV

3

Norw

ich

So

uth

ern

Bypass L

an

dscap

e P

rote

ction

Zo

ne E

NV

6

Pro

tection I

mpo

rta

nt

Sp

aces (

IMP

3)

Bro

wn

field

/Gre

enfield

Agricu

ltura

l La

nd G

rade 1

, 2

Lis

ted B

uild

ing

Conserv

ation

Are

a

Sche

dule

d A

ncie

nt M

on

um

en

t

SS

SI/R

am

sar

Cou

nty

Wild

life

Site

SA

C/S

PA

Flo

od

Ris

k

Serv

ice A

vaila

bili

ty (

Utilit

ies)

Loca

l A

ccess to

Serv

ices

Sew

age

tre

atm

en

t w

ork

s s

afe

gu

ard

ing

Pre

ferr

ed O

ption

Co

nclu

sio

n

Preferred Option Comments Am

en

dm

en

ts to

Pre

ferr

ed O

ptions

Expla

na

tion o

f A

me

ndm

ent

to P

refe

rre

d O

ptio

ns

Reg

ula

tion

19 O

utc

om

e a

nd P

olic

y N

um

ber

1188 Long Stratton Long Stratton Mill Housing/ Employment Leeder Yes r g g g g a g r g g g g g g a r a

Listed mill tower in southern portion of site in prominent position from main access to site.

Gas pipeline 600m to east. Removed from main settlement.

Site rejected for reasons referred to at Preferred Options stage

0107 Long Stratton

off Flowerpot

Lane next to Industrial Estate Housing Watts Yes g g g g g a g g g g g g g g a a a

Paddock well screened with hedgerows. TPO on adjoining land to south east and on

opposite side of Chequers Road. Withdrawn application for business park (2005/2413). Anglian Water score as Red due to Foul

Sewerage Network capacity. Sewers cross site. Could be considered as an extension to adjacent employment site but more distant

from services than other sites if being considered for residential development (900m to high school, 700m to nearest shops, 300m

to bus service, just over 1km to doctors surgery)

Site rejected for reasons referred to

at Preferred Options stage

0146 Long Stratton Picton Road Housing Smith Yes r g g g g a g g g g g g g g a a a

Site is removed from main settlement and

although adjacent to some existing development is not in a location that new development is to be focused due to access

to services. Listed Building at Hill Farm on opposite side of Forncett Road, though development of this site unlikely to have an

impact on its setting. Refused applications for a single dwelling in 1980s. Anglian Water score as Red due to Foul Sewerage Network

capacity. Over 800m to all core services other than bus service.



0189 Long Stratton St Mary's Road Housing Lusty Yes g g g g g a g g g g g g g g a a a

Relatively remote from services (650m from recreation facilities, 550m to nearest shops (inc. convenience store), schools just over

800m, doctors surgery over 800m) compared to other sites. Although development of this site in itself would be relatively intrusive,

development with 238 (and potentially a larger 504) would protrude more into open countryside. Without a larger site 504, all

access would need to be through St Mary's Road.



0198 Long Stratton Chequers Road Housing SNC Yes g g g g g a g a g g g g g g a g a

Planning application for 120 dwellings

(2010/2225), with committee resolution to approve. Listed The Poplars adjacent to south-west corner. TPO’d trees on southern

boundary of site. Anglian Water score as Red due to Foul Sewerage Network capacity. Water mains cross site. Mineral policy

required. Doctors surgery approximately 200m, primary school approximately 300m, employment opportunities within 500m, bus

service within 600m, shop approximately 800m

Site has been

granted planning permission

since the preferred option consultation but

will not be counted towards the 1,800 dwellings.

80

0238 Long Stratton St Mary's Road Housing Lusty Yes a g g g g a g g g g g g g g a a a

Same issues with services as site 189 but with around an additional 100m.

Development of site dependent on site 189 - see conclusions for that site.



0319 Long Stratton

Off St Michael's

Road Mixed Use Smith Yes g g g g g a g g g g g g g g a g a

Anglian Water score Red due to Cordon

Sanitaire. Water Mains and Foul Sewer cross site. Mineral policy required. Adjacent to employment opportunities and doctor’s

surgery and primary school on opposite side of road. If access via St Michaels Rd can be achieved then 320m to bus and 435m to

shop.

Following the

Preferred Options consultation the Council has

decided to allocated this site & site (951c & 729)

for housing (up to 600 dwellings) and employment

(approximately 1.5 ha) (indicative location)

development. LSAAP Policy numbers (LNGS1).

0365 Long Stratton

Land at Chequers

Farm Housing Birch Yes a g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

Paddock on stretch of Chequers Road which currently has a semi-rural character with a

sporadic pattern of development including some listed properties such as The Meadows opposite the site, although the development of

site 198 may alter this to some extent. However, even with development of site 198 this site will remain slightly detached from the

main built-up area and incongruent in the local area. Remote from services compared to other sites, although employment

opportunities and recreation facilities are approximately 500m. Anglian Water score as Red due to Foul Sewerage Network capacity.

Site rejected for reasons referred to at Preferred

Options stage

0504 Long Stratton

land south

Flowerpot Lane Housing Alexander Yes g g g g g a g g g g g g g g a a a

Site proposed is only part of field and would

only realistically make sense to develop whole field as part of a larger scheme, potentially with sites 238 and 189. However, this area is

more remote from services compared to other sites and does not offer the same potential to deliver the requirements of the JCS. TPO'd

woodland at north-western corner of site. Employment opportunities close by, shop approximately 700m, nursery school within

800m bur primary and high school over 800m


Options stage

542 Long Stratton

land adj. Churchfields Road Housing Hyde Yes g g g g g a g g g g g g g g a g a

Site to be considered as part of larger site R0983b which has the potential to deliver key

requirements of the JCS such as the by-pass. Anglian Water score Red due to Foul Sewerage Network Capacity. Range of shops

and employment opportunities including supermarket within 400m for pedestrians and cyclists via Star Lane, bus service 300m

approximately, school approximately 800m

No

Following the Preferred Options

consultation the Council has decided to allocate

this site for housing development (including sites

RO983a, RO983b, 0719, RO443) for approximately 1200

dwellings. LSAAP Policy number (LNGS1).

0719 Long Stratton land at Hall Lane Housing Smith Yes g g g g g a g a a g g g g g a a a

Backland site currently with narrow access from Ipswich Road. Access could also be

achieved from Hall Lane by redeveloping Two Hooks which is within the suggested site or through site R0983b. Grade I listed church

immediately to west of site. Sewers crossing site. Range of shops and employment opportunities and bus service within 200m.

School more than 800m.



this site for housing development (including sites

RO983a, RO983b, 0542, RO443) for approximately 1200

dwellings. LSAAP Policy number (LNGS1).

81

0729 Long Stratton

land at The Red House, Norwich

Road Housing Sapey Yes a g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

The Red House is Grade II listed of which the site forms part of the curtilage of. Inclusion of

this site within the development boundary would only be appropriate if Site 951c was to be taken forward as a site for development.

Scores red on Foul Sewerage Network Capacity. Bus service only core service within 800m.



this site (and sites 951c, 319) for housing (up to 600

dwellings). LSAAP Policy numbers (LNGS1).

0951a Long Stratton

Land north of Long Stratton east

of A140 Stratton Housing

Sargent & Cedars Farm

Settlement Yes a g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

The Cedars on western edge of site is Grade II listed, plus cottages in south western

corner. Adjacent to SNLP River Valley (on opposite side of B1527). Anglian Water score as Red due to Foul Sewerage Network

Capacity. Water mains cross site. Minerals policy required. Bus service only core service within 800m.


Options stage

0951b Long Stratton

Land north of

Long Stratton west of A140 Stratton Housing

Sargent & Cedars Farm Settlement Yes a g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

The Cedars on opposite side of A140 is Grade II listed. Adjacent to SNLP River

Valley (on opposite side of Bungay Road). Anglian Water score as Red due to Foul Sewerage Network Capacity. Water mains

crossing site. Minerals policy required. Bus service only core service within 800m.

Site rejected for

reasons referred to at Preferred Options stage

0951c Long Stratton

Land north of Long Stratton

west of A140 Stratton Housing

Sargent &

Cedars Farm Settlement Yes g g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

Detached from main settlement and therefore services (bus service only core service within 800m) - would only be appropriate to be taken

forward if part of a larger site with sites 319 and R0983d to provide a large part of the development allocated for Long Stratton.

Grade II listed buildings on east of site on A140. Anglian Water score as Red due to Cordon Sanitaire. Water mains crossing site.

Mineral policy required.

Following the Preferred Options consultation the

Council has decided to allocated this site &

site (0319) to contribute to housing (up to 600

dwellings ) and employment (approximately 1.5

ha) (indicative location) development.

LSAAP Policy numbers (LNGS1).

1084 Long Stratton

Mix-a-Man

Cement Works Site, Ipswich Road Housing Ward Yes r g g g g g g a g g g g g g a a a

Grade II listed The Cottage between site and the A140. Would only be practical to develop as a residential development with larger

development including R0983c given existing detached nature from main settlement and distance from services (bus service and

employment opportunities only core services within 800m). Water mains crossing site.

Site rejected for

reasons referred to at Preferred Options stage

1085 Long Stratton

Land adj.

Industrial Estate, Chequers Road

Housing/ Commercial Hardesty Yes g g g g g a g g g g g g g g a a a

Flat open field with no strong boundary features either with Chequers Road or open

landscape to west. No recent relevant planning history. Water mains crossing site. Adjacent employment site, however further to

other services (High school approximately 800m, surgery approximately 750m) than other sites being considered for residential

development.



A0020 Long Stratton

Land adj. Plant

Depot, Ipswich Road Employment Unknown

Existing employment

allocation - check deliverability g g g g g a g g g g g g g a a a a

Planning permission (implemented) for c/u of plant depot to scaffolding business depot. Remainder of site remains in agricultural use.

SFRA shows area of Zone 2 Flood Risk. Anglian Water score Red due to Foul Sewerage Network Capacity.

Approximately 6 ha of employment land allocation through

the South Norfolk Local Plan (2003). This land has not

come forward to date. Site allocated for approximately 8 ha

of employment land (LNGS1).

82

R0443 Long Stratton

Land at The Parsonage, Norwich Road Peecock Yes g g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

Historically land associated with The Old Parsonage, access would now need to be

through Churchfields estate. Resolution to grant permission (2011/1916) for 11 affordable housing units. School over 1km.



this site for housing development which will contribute to

the approximate 1200. LSAAP Policy number

(LNGS1).

R0983a Long Stratton

Land surrounding Hawthorn Farm & Lodge Farm Mixed use Leeder Yes a g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

Detached from main settlement, development of this site would only be appropriate in conjunction with R0983b to deliver Long

Stratton By-pass. Adjoining listed buildings at Lodge Farm and Cherry Tree Farm, and opposite side of A140 at The Cottage and

Wild Rose Farm. Anglian Water score Red due to Foul Sewerage Network Capacity. Water Mains crossing site. Shops in town

centre just over 900m, schools and doctors surgery over 1km. Employment opportunities just to north.

Following the Preferred Options consultation the

Council has decided to allocate this site for housing

development. The site will contribute to the approximate

1200. LSAAP Policy number (LNGS1).

R0983b Long Stratton Land east of A140 residential estate Mixed use Leeder Yes g g g g g a g a g g g g g a a g a

Listed buildings adjoin northern part of site and could also impact on listed buildings in centre of Long Stratton. SFRA shows area of

Zone 2 Flood Risk. Anglian Water score as Red due to Foul Sewerage Network Capacity. Pumping stations, water mains and sewer on

site.



this site for housing and employment (indicative)

development. LSAAP Policy numbers (LNGS1).

R0983c Long Stratton

Land south-west

of A140 residential estate Mixed use Leeder Yes a g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

Detached from main settlement and would only be feasible as a residential development as part of a larger southern extension to the

built-up area with R0983a. Bus service and employment opportunities only services within 800m. Potential impact on listed buildings

including Lodge Farm House on opposite side of A140 and The College. Anglian Water score as Red due to Foul Sewerage Network

capacity. Water mains and sewer cross site.

Site rejected

R0983d Long Stratton

Land north-west of A140

residential estate Mixed use Leeder Yes g g g g g a g a g g g g g g a a a

Adjacent to existing residential development

on St Michaels Road from where access is possible as well as direct from the A140. Public footpath on northern boundary. Could

de developed either as a small northern extension to the built-up area or as part of a larger development with sites 319 and 951c.

600m to centre of Long Stratton but over 800m to school and doctors surgery. Listed Orchard leigh opposite could also affect

Pepyrs to the north. Anglian Water score as Red due to Cordon Sanitare. Water mains and sewer cross site.

Following the

Preferred Options consultation the Council has

decided to allocate this site for housing development

(contribute to the approximate 600 dwellings). LSAAP

Policy number (LNGS1).

S0125 Long Stratton

Flowerpot Lane,

North of Industrial Estate Housing Unknown

SHLAA- check deliverability

See 1085

S0133 Long Stratton Land at Ipswich Road Housing Unknown

SHLAA- check deliverability

See A0020

83

Z1268 Long Stratton

Land to the west of Tharston Industrial Estate Employment

Easton/ Bennington Yes g g g g g a g g g g g g g g g a g

Open land to rear of existing industrial estate. Public footpath passes through northern

portion of site.

Site allocated for 2.5 ha of

employment land. LSAAP Policy number (LNGS2).

Z1269 Long Stratton

Stratton Motor

Company

Town centre

uses Bennington Yes g g g g g g g r a g g g g a a a g

Heydon House which is partly in site is Grade II listed, however redevelopment of rest of site offers an opportunity for a significant

improvement to the setting of the building. Most of site, including entire frontage onto A140, falls within conservation area. Small

part of site in Flood Risk Zone 2 on SFRA. Surface sewers crossing site.

The site has been incorporated within an amended town

centre boundary and could be suitable for town

centres uses. LSAAP Policy number (LNGS5).

84

11.3 As described under Task B2, the Council then used the individual site assessment work to develop a number of alternative strategic options for accommodating housing and employment growth in the town. To enable the effects of these different scenarios to be predicted it was necessary to test each option against the SA Framework. Tables 11.2 and 11.3 below summarise the predicted effect of each option for housing and employment land (see Appendix 7 for the full SA assessment of housing options and Appendix 8 for the full SA assessment for employment options):

Table 11.2 – summary of the predicted effects of different housing growth scenarios

Housing Development Scenario

SA Objectives

Option 1

Option 2 Option 3 Option 4

ENV1 - 0 - 0 - 0 - 0

ENV2 0 0 0 0

ENV3 0 0 0 0

ENV4 0 + ++ ++ ++

ENV5 0 + 0 + 0 + 0 +

ENV6 - 0 - 0 -- 0 - 0

ENV7 - -- -- --

ENV8 + + + +

ENV9 0 0 0 0

S1 ++ ++ ++ ++

S2 0 0 0 0

S3 0 0 0 0

S4 + ++ + 0 +

S5 0 0 0 0

S6 0 0 0 0

S7 0 0 0 0

S8 0 0 0 0

EC1 + + + +

EC2 0 0 0 0

EC3 + ++ ++ ++

EC4 0 0 0 0

EC5 0 0 0 0

Key: ++ Major Positive, + Minor Positive, 0 Neutral Effect, - Minor Negative, -- Major Negative, ? Uncertain Effect

85

Table 11.3 – summary of predicted effects of different employment growth scenarios

Employment Development Scenario

SA Objectives Option 1 Option 2 Option 3

ENV1 0 - 0 - 0

ENV2 0 0 0

ENV3 0 0 0

ENV4 + + ++

ENV5 0 + +

ENV6 0 + +

ENV7 - - -

ENV8 + + +

ENV9 0 0 0

S1 0 0 0

S2 0 0 0

S3 ++ ++ ++

S4 ++ ++ ++

S5 0 0 0

S6 0 0 0

S7 0 0 0

S8 0 0 0

EC1 ++ ++ ++

EC2 + + +

EC3 ++ ++ ++

EC4 ? ? ?

EC5 0 0 0

Predicting the effect of other policies and proposals 11.4 Although many of the other policies and proposals in the AAP do not

have alternative options it is still important to be able to predict the effects of these policies and proposals, so they were also tested against the SA framework (see Appendix 9). Table 11.4 below summarises the predicted effects of these policies and proposals.

86

Table 11.4 – summary of predicted effects of other policies and proposals

SA Framework Objective

Other Policies Town Centre

Environment Recreation Accessibility Development

Boundary

De

fin

ing

a

To

wn

Ce

ntr

e

Pre

se

rvin

g

&

en

ha

ncin

g

the

h

isto

ric

ch

ara

cte

r o

f

Lo

ng

Str

att

on

Pro

vis

ion

o

f

GI

Pro

tec

tin

g

ex

isti

ng

op

en

sp

ac

e

Ne

w

op

en

sp

ac

e

&

imp

rov

ing

ex

isti

ng

Ne

w

bu

ria

l

gro

un

d

Ac

ce

ss

ibil

ity

De

ve

lop

me

nt

Bo

un

da

ry

ENV 1 0 0 ++ 0 0 0 0 0

ENV 2 0 0 + 0 0 0 0 0

ENV 3 + + 0 0 0 0 + +

ENV 4 + + + + + 0 ++ 0

ENV 5 ++ 0 + + 0 0 + 0

ENV 6 ++ ++ ++ 0 + 0 0 0

ENV 7 ++ 0 + 0 0 0 0 0

ENV 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

ENV 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S2 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S3 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S4 ++ 0 0 ++ ++ 0 + 0

S5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S6 0 0 + + + 0 + 0

S7 + 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

S8 ++ 0 + + + 0 0 + 0

EC 1 ++ + 0 0 0 0 0 + 0

EC 2 ++ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

EC 3 ++ 0 0 0 0 0 + 0

EC 4 + 0 + 0 0 0 + 0

EC 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Key: ++ Major Positive, + Minor Positive, 0 Neutral Effect, - Minor Negative, -- Major Negative, ? Uncertain Effect

87

12. Task B4 – Evaluating the Effects of the Long Stratton Area Action Plan

Evaluating the effects of site assessment and the development of broad options for growth 12.1 The predicted effects of each individual development site were

evaluated through the site assessment table, resulting in an overall conclusion for each site (see Appendix 6 and Table 11.1). As already described this then helped to inform the development and consideration of a number of broad options for housing and employment which were tested against the SA Framework and this therefore informed the final choice of sites to include in the Long Stratton AAP.

12.2 Tables 11.2 and 11.3 above (and Appendices 7 and 8) show that each

option for the distribution of housing and employment growth has potential positive and negative effects, which have been summarised and evaluated in Tables 12.1 and 12.2 below. These tables are followed by a conclusion outlining the Council’s preferred option for both housing and employment distribution.

Table 12.1 – Evaluating the effects of the options for housing growth

OPTION 1: 1,800 dwellings and bypass to east of town

Positive effects:

After delivery of bypass, HGV traffic will avoid town centre

Bypass will also take through-traffic out of Long Stratton

Reduced traffic levels will lead to improved air quality and townscape

Central services will become more pedestrian-friendly

Improvement in housing supply

Delivery of new primary school in location accessible to new residents

Public transport and local employment opportunities are within walking distance

Concentrated growth may help provision of new services

Negative effects:

Wood Green CWS and Tyrells Wood/New Plantation SSSI might be impacted by traffic noise, and disruption during construction phase

Loss of historic field pattern

Loss of undeveloped, agricultural land

Evaluation of option: Although this option does have negative aspects, particularly its proximity to designated sites and the fact that it is the development of greenfield land, these aspects can be outweighed by the positive benefits that this development could bring. Development to the east will deliver a bypass and therefore offers real opportunities to improve the centre of Long Stratton and to co-locate services and facilities with new housing in the area. The landscape demonstrates some historic field patterns, but there is no significant landscape impact and development could maintain historic landscape character patterns to some extent, and provide green

88

infrastructure.

OPTION 2: 1,200 dwellings and bypass to east, 600 dwellings to north-west of Long Stratton

Positive effects:









North-west location is well-related to the high school, GP and local employment opportunities.

Negative effects:


Loss of historic field pattern to the east

Loss of more undeveloped, agricultural land and habitats

Evaluation of option: Although this option builds the negative aspects of option 1, particularly the loss of additional undeveloped land, there are additional positive effects as well. Development to the east will deliver a bypass and the opportunity to co-locate services and facilities with new housing in the area; development to the north-west provides a second location which is well-related to existing services and employment opportunities. This also offers the opportunity of redirecting traffic flow away from the town centre, and would allow a less dense development on land to the east and west.

OPTION 3: 1,000 dwellings and bypass to east, 600 dwellings to north-west and 200 dwellings to south-west of Long Stratton

Positive effects:






Possible delivery of new primary school in location

Negative effects:



Loss of even more undeveloped, agricultural land and habitats

Spreading growth may hinder provision of new services

89

accessible to new residents



South-west location is well-related to local employment opportunities and fairly well-related to schools

Evaluation of option: Although this option also builds on the negative aspects of option 1, particularly the loss of additional undeveloped land, there are some additional positive effects as well. Development to the east will deliver a bypass and the opportunity to co-locate services and facilities with new housing in the area; development to the north-west provides a second location which is well-related to existing services and employment opportunities; development to the south-west provides a third location which is well-related to existing employment opportunities, and quite well-related to existing services. However, reducing the level of housing growth on the east of Long Stratton to 1,000 dwellings could potentially affect the deliverability of a new school.

OPTION 4: 1,800 dwellings and bypass to east plus 600 to north-west

Positive effects:









Higher level of growth could eventually support more local services


Negative effects:



Loss of more undeveloped, agricultural land and habitats

Higher levels of growth may overwhelm infrastructure and local services in the mid-term

Additional housing to this level would make it difficult for employment allocations to achieve self-containment for Long Stratton

90

Evaluation of option: The negative impacts of this option are similar to option 2, with the additional potential impact that this level of growth could overwhelm local services in the mid-term, before they are able to expand. It could also hinder self-containment difficult, as it could be difficult to attract sufficient new employers to provide equitable employment opportunities in Long Stratton. Development to the east will deliver a bypass and the opportunity to co-locate services and facilities with new housing in the area; development to the north-west provides a second location which is well-related to existing services and employment opportunities.

PREFERRED OPTION FOR HOUSING GROWTH – OPTION 2: MAJOR GROWTH TO THE EAST WITH ADDITIONAL GROWTH IN THE NORTH-WEST Predicting and evaluating the effects of individual sites and growth options has led to identification of ‘preferred sites’ in the AAP for housing. The Council is proposing to accommodate the 1,800 new houses required by the JCS using Option 2 (approximately 1,200 homes and bypass to the east, and approximately 600 homes to the north-west) in a single policy. Whilst these are considered as two separate sites by virtue of the A140, there will be a single policy for the 1,800 new homes (including employment growth) to ensure comprehensive delivery, phasing and implementation of housing, bypass, associated infrastructure, landscaping, open space and employment. Although all the options assessed have negative environmental impacts, major growth to the east will deliver a bypass and will also enable delivery of a school to serve these new dwellings, while allocating some development to the north-west provides a second, sustainable location which is well-related to existing services and potentially improves traffic flow. It is considered that Option 2 provides the best opportunity for improving Long Stratton reflecting many of the views given by local residents and stakeholders. No other reasonable alternatives are proposed for the allocation of housing growth as it was considered that a large development in other locations around the town would not be able to deliver a bypass, and therefore could not improve the centre of Long Stratton. It is also considered that exceeding 1,800 dwellings could overwhelm local services, and spreading 1,800 dwellings over more sites may risk the delivery of a school to support the growth. The Council considers that it has chosen the most appropriate options in the context of the sustainability criteria on the site assessment checklist.

91

Table 12.2 – Evaluating the effects of the options for employment growth

OPTION 1: RETAIN AND EXPAND EXISTING A140 ALLOCATION

Positive effects:

Well-related to potential housing growth area

Moderately well-related to existing built-up area

Site in existing employment use

Potential for existing business to expand in situ

Increase in local job opportunities reduces need to travel to Norwich

Negative effects:

Proximity to Wood Green CWS (although route of proposed bypass is closer)

Will require land currently in agricultural use

Evaluation of option: An extension to the existing A140 employment allocation would bring important economic benefits to Long Stratton with fairly neutral environmental and impacts. There are social benefits of additional local job opportunities which are well related to potential residential areas and fairly well-related to existing residential areas.

OPTION 2: RETAIN A140 ALLOCATION WITH MODEST EXPANSION AND EXTEND THARSTON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE

Positive effects:

Both sites well-related to existing built-up area

A140 site well-related to potential housing growth area

Expansion of Tharston Industrial Estate will enable bypass

A140 site in existing employment use

Potential for existing businesses to expand in situ


Negative effects:


If Tharston Industrial Estate is extended to the north, site would be around 500m from Hill Farm Woodland CWS

Will require more land currently in agricultural use

Evaluation of option: A small extension to the existing A140 employment allocation and extension of Tharston Industrial Estate would bring more positive economic benefits to Long Stratton. The loss of agricultural land increases with each site selected, however so accessibility does. Extension to the north of Tharston Industrial Estate could impact on Hill Farm Woodland County Wildlife Site, particularly during construction phase and depending upon use, once operational. Expanding Tharston Industrial Estate would be necessary to enable relocation of existing employment uses in the potential route of the bypass. However, both sites are well-related to residential areas, and would balance the opportunities for employment each side of the existing A140. Additional employment opportunities here would increase the opportunities for sustainable travel-to-work choices and reduce the need to travel to Norwich.

92

OPTION 3: RETAIN EXISTING A140 ALLOCATION WITH MODEST EXPANSION, EXTEND THARSTON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PLUS ADDITIONAL EMPLOYMENT ALLOCATION WITH HOUSING IN NORTH-WEST OF LONG STRATTON

Positive effects:

Both sites well-related to existing built-up area

A140 site well-related to potential housing growth area

Expansion of Tharston Industrial Estate will enable bypass

A140 site in existing employment use

Potential for existing businesses to expand in situ


Negative effects:


If Tharston Industrial Estate is extended to the north, site would be around 500m from Hill Farm Woodland CWS

Will require more land currently in agricultural use

Evaluation of option: A small extension to the existing A140 employment allocation, extension of Tharston Industrial Estate and additional employment allocation in the north-west would bring positive economic benefits to Long Stratton. The loss of agricultural land increases with each site selected, however so does accessibility. Extension to the north of Tharston Industrial Estate could impact on Hill Farm Woodland County Wildlife Site, particularly during construction phase and depending upon use, once operational. Expanding Tharston Industrial Estate would be necessary to enable relocation of existing employment uses in the potential route of the bypass. However, all sites are well-related to residential areas, and would balance the opportunities for employment each side of the existing A140. Additional employment opportunities at all sites would increase the opportunities for sustainable travel-to-work choices and reduce the need to travel to Norwich. While accessibility improves with close proximity to residential areas, new employment sites would need careful integration with residential development to prevent incompatible uses.

93

PREFERRED OPTIONS FOR EMPLOYMENT GROWTH - OPTION 3: RETENTION/EXPANSION OF A140 ALLOCATION AND EXPANSION OF THARSTON INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, PLUS NEW ALLOCATION TO THE NORTH-WEST OF LONG STRATTON Predicting and evaluating the effects of individual sites and growth options for employment allocations has led to the identification of three areas within the in the AAP for employment use. The Council is proposing to retain the existing site on the A140 with a modest expansion, extend Tharston industrial estate, plus an additional employment allocation in the North West of Long Stratton to accompany the housing growth (Option 3). Although all options have negative impacts it is felt that these would be outweighed by the potential positive economic impacts. In particular, Options 3 allows for the relocation of an existing employment use which is on the route of the proposed Long Stratton bypass. The bypass is a key policy requirement of growth at Long Stratton, as outlined in the JCS, and will produce townscape improvements. Mitigation measures will need to be put into effect to minimise negative effects.

Evaluating the effects of other policies and proposals 12.3 Table 11.4 shows that the other policies and proposals in the AAP are

predicted to have either positive or neutral effects. There are no potential negative effects associated with these policies, and the town centre policy is predicted to have the most positive effect.

Long Stratton Area Action Plan – Preferred Options Consultation – May-July 2013 and Consultation on Interim SA Report 12.4 The Preferred Options consultation document outlined the preferred

sites that the Council intended to consider for housing and employment, as well a number of other specific policies and proposals for Long Stratton. The justification for these sites, policies and proposals was outlined in an interim SA Report which accompanied the Preferred Options consultation.

94

Update since the 2013 Preferred Options Consultation 12.5 The Interim SA Report has been updated to take into account the

responses to the Preferred Options public consultation which took place between May and July 2013. This has resulted in the publication of this Draft SA Report, July 2014.

12.6 In addition to minor changes to policies and supporting text, the Council has granted planning permission for 120 dwellings at Chequers Road in Tharlston. Changes to the development boundary to encompass this application were reflected within the Preferred Option consultation.

12.7 The potential constraints to development due to the capacity of local waste water infrastructure at the Long Stratton Water Recycling Centre, where solutions for accommodating more than 1,400 dwellings may be required. As proposed development exceeds 1,400 dwellings, upgrades and/or capacity at the Water Recycling Centre will need to be established which continue to safeguard the Broads SAC/SPA downstream and meet the requirements of the Water Framework Directive (WFD). The impact of at least 1,800 new dwellings will need to be considered in combination with permitted growth, supporting services (schools, community buildings etc.) and employment development. Anglian Water and the Environment Agency have advised that, provided appropriate phasing of housing is implemented along with an agreed foul water strategy which considers the phasing, management and monitoring of overall development in Long Stratton, and then this should not pose an obstacle to delivering proposed growth. This approach would ensure that dwellings would not be occupied ahead of improvements in treatment technology capabilities at the Long Stratton Water Recycling Centre and prevent deterioration in waste quality the downstream water course to meet the requirements of the WFD.

12.8 The lack of burial provision was identified during the Preferred Options consultation. In response to this, the Council has included an additional policy to reflect current burial rates and support a new burial ground in Long Stratton if required within the plan period. Additionally, the Preferred Option consultation responses and content within the AAP identified the importance of the historic environment of Long Stratton. An additional policy has now been included within the ‘Environment’ section to preserve ad enhance the historic character of Long Stratton.

Overall Effects of the Long Stratton AAP 12.9 The Sustainability Appraisal of the adopted Joint Core Strategy (JCS)

(September 2009), summarises the main sustainability impacts of the JCS in Chapter 5.4. It notes that the two main elements of the JCS Growth Strategy as they relate to South Norfolk are major expansion of a number of existing communities (including Long Stratton) and lesser expansion of other communities. The JCS SA notes that the generally dispersed pattern of growth proposed results in a number of sustainability considerations for South Norfolk, such as effects on the character, distinctiveness and quality of the local environment of settlements receiving growth, and potential public transport implications.

95

12.10 In setting the settlement hierarchy for South Norfolk, the JCS SA considered synergistic and cumulative impacts. Particularly noted (in paragraph 5.3.3) is the need to consider catchment-wide factors to ensure that environmental capacity in areas such as water quality impacts and biodiversity are not breached.

12.11 Paragraph 5.4.10 of the JCS SA concludes that “the hierarchical

approach to growth that is promoted should generally ensure that the amount of growth targeted to a settlement is directly dependent upon the size of the existing settlement, and, more specifically, the availability of local services, facilities and employment opportunities. This is a sensible approach that should help to reduce car dependency”.

12.12 In essence, the likely significant environmental effects of the Long

Stratton AAP are concluded to be broadly those types identified in the JCS SA. Given the largely rural nature of South Norfolk (and the lack of large brownfield sites in Long Stratton) the majority of new allocations (for housing and employment) will need to be on greenfield sites in order to identify sufficient new dwellings and employment land to meet minima set out in the adopted JCS. There will therefore inevitably be some loss of agricultural land and some impacts on landscape character. However, there is also likely to be an increase in the self-sustainability of Long Stratton, through reaching a better balance of homes and jobs, greater levels of walking, cycling and public transport use, and significantly improved levels of green infrastructure in and around the town to alleviate pressure on nearby environmentally sensitive areas.

Short-term effects 12.13 Most of the impacts relating the Long Stratton AAP are permanent in

nature, reflecting the permanence of new dwellings and employment land (once built on). However, there will be some short-term impacts, principally relating to construction operations – noise, dust, HGV movements etc. A (largely) positive short-term effect might be where extraction of sand and gravel underneath a site takes place prior to development occurring, with that sand and gravel used wherever possible in on-site construction activities.

Medium and long-term effects 12.14 Once built out, a new development site has a different set of impacts,

most of which will last into the foreseeable future, and be permanent. All of the allocated sites in Long Stratton will require expansion of the development boundary into what has historically been open countryside, with loss of agricultural land and potential adverse impacts on the character of the settlement, countryside and landscape. Other longer-term effects will include additional demand for fresh water, gas and electricity and increased production of waste water, however new buildings are now required to meet increasingly stringent requirements in terms of environmental performance.

12.15 It is inevitable that major growth will lead to an increase in car-usage in

Long Stratton. However, particular effort has been made to try to allocate sites which are close to public transport links and which are

96

accessible to schools, jobs and services by walking and cycling means to minimise the need for car-usage. Additionally, the construction of the bypass will relieve town entre congestion and reduce traffic impacts upon this part of the along the A140.

12.16 There will also be some positive benefits. Development to the east will

deliver a bypass and the opportunity to co-locate services and facilities with new housing in the area; development to the north-west provides a second location which is well-related to existing services and employment opportunities. This also offers the opportunity of redirecting traffic flow away from the town centre, and would allow a less dense development on land to the east and west. Concentrating much new growth to the east will also allow a new primary school to be built to serve the site, increasing the attractiveness of walking and cycling to school. It is hoped that the expansion and new provision of employment land in Long Stratton will also ‘capture’ more employment activity in Long Stratton itself, allowing Long Stratton to become more self-contained.

Cumulative and synergistic effects 12.17 The JCS SA (2009) considers potential cumulative effects of the JCS

policies in paragraphs 5.3.1-5.3.4. Potential cumulative impacts on water quality and biodiversity were raised as being particularly important. As the Long Stratton AAP implements JCS policies on overall housing (and employment land) numbers, the associated mitigation measures included in the JCS (including measures identified in the Local Investment Plan and Programme) should ensure that these types of larger potential cumulative effects are minimised.

12.18 Other cumulative effects will also occur through the implementation of

the Long Stratton AAP alongside the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, the Wymondham Area Action Plan, the Cringleford Neighbourhood Plan and the Norwich City Local Plan. These might include, for instance, additional pressure on local services and infrastructure (such as water supply and wastewater treatment capacity and the capacity of major road junctions, such as the A11/A14Harford junction). However, some cumulative effects could be positive, such as enabling ‘thresholds’ for key services (such as a new or improved bus service) to be reached. Applying appropriate mitigation measures will be key to ensuring that the effects of any cumulative impacts are minimised.

Consideration of alternatives 12.19 No other reasonable alternatives were considered for the allocation of

housing growth as it was considered that a large development in other locations around the town would not be able to deliver a bypass, and therefore could not improve the centre of Long Stratton. It is also considered that exceeding 1,800 dwellings could overwhelm local services, and spreading 1,800 dwellings over more sites may risk the delivery of a school to support the growth.

97

12.20 Secondly, each of the 25 proposed sites was assessed in detail, with

the results forming part of the Preferred Options consultation in May 2013.

12.21 Thirdly, a range of strategic options for the location of the 1800

dwellings (concentrated to the east and north west of Long Stratton and new employment land were considered and appraised before the final choice of allocated sites was made.

98

13. Task B5 – Mitigating the Effects and Maximising Benefits

13.1 Key mitigation measures to support the overall level of growth in South

Norfolk have been considered as an integral part of the Joint Core Strategy (JCS) and also the Long Stratton AAP. The Norwich Area Growth Area Infrastructure Needs and Funding Study (December 2007) and the Local Investment Plan and Programme (which is updated on a six-monthly basis) identify and prioritise key strategic measures. This includes elements such as major transport improvements (at the A140/A47Harford junction, for instance), the need for various new schools, improved green infrastructure, utilities upgrades and new community facilities. Where particularly relevant (mainly for the larger sites), the need to contribute towards larger pieces of infrastructure is mentioned in individual site policies.

13.2 The JCS provides for a range of improvements required for strategic

provisions of transport, green infrastructure and utilities, to be funded by a combination of developer contributions, utility providers, Norfolk County Council and the Highways Agency.

13.3 Site specific mitigation measures were considered as an integral part of

assessing the suitability of sites in the Long Stratton AAP. The Pre-submission Long Stratton AAP includes policy considerations to address and mitigate identified effects in relation to allocated sites. Such considerations include the requirement for local off-site road improvements, foul and surface water drainage network improvements, enhanced pedestrian and cycle links, the provision of landscaping and green infrastructure, the provision of a new school, design requirements for developments to be sympathetic to particular local circumstances. Other mitigations will include improvements to A140 corridor with bus priority at the A140/A148 junction.

13.4 Although each site’s mitigation requirements differ, common mitigation

measures required for allocated sites include elements such as:

Phasing of housing and employment development to ensure sufficient waste water capacity and required infrastructure for development in in place.

Contributions to maintaining, protecting and improving green infrastructure in and around Long Stratton to alleviate potential indirect impacts of housing developments on sites such Fritton Common and Tyrells Wood SSS, Wood Green New Plantation CWS.

The need to consider, where relevant (allocation dependant) to consider whether extraction of sand and gravel prior to development taking place is feasible and deliverable.

99

14. Task B6 – Monitoring of Significant Effects 14.1 Under Section 35 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004,

planning authorities are required to monitor and report on the implementation of Local Plan policies. The Sustainability Appraisal indicators must also be monitored.

14.2 The three district councils of the GNDP produce a single combined Annual Monitoring Report each year (principally to monitor the Joint Core Strategy), and the monitoring process will involve:

Comparison of the current state against the baseline;

Analysis of changes to indicators

Analysis of performance against targets and objectives.

Table 14.1 describes the envisaged monitoring regime for this SA/SEA:

14.3 The monitoring regime for the Sustainability Appraisal of the Long Stratton Area Action Plan will track the same indicators as the other South Norfolk Local Plan Documents (including the Joint Core Strategy).

Table 14.1: Monitoring Framework

Environmental Objectives SA Indicators


i) Percentage of SSSIs in favourable

condition or unfavourable

recovering condition

ii) Biodiversity Action Plan

habitats/species actions in

progress/completed

iii) Net change in the number of Tree

Preservation Orders

iv) Net change in County Wildlife Sites

in ‘Positive Conservation

Management’

Sources: Natural England, Norfolk

Biodiversity Partnership, South Norfolk

Council, Norfolk Wildlife Trust


Number of planning permissions granted contrary to the advice of the Environment Agency and/or NPPF on flood defence grounds (within Flood Zones 2 or 3).

Number of dwellings permitted within the high risk flood areas (Flood Zones 2 and 3)

Sources: Environment Agency and South Norfolk Council

100

ENV 3 To maximise the use of renewable energy solutions and reduce contributions to

climate change

i) CO2 emissions per capita (million

tonnes carbon equivalent)

ii) Renewable energy capacity

permitted by type

Sources: DECC, South Norfolk Council, Norfolk County Council


% of residents who travel to work:

a) By private motor vehicle

b) By public transport

c) By foot or cycle

d) Work at home or mainly from home

Source: Census


Number of designated Air Quality Management Areas (AQMAs)

Source: South Norfolk Council/Norfolk County Council


i) Number of listed buildings and

Scheduled Ancient Monuments on

the Buildings at Risk Register

ii) Listed Buildings/Scheduled

Monuments lost/damaged by

development

iii) Number of Conservation Area

Character Appraisal and

Management Plans adopted

iv) Number of TPOs served

Sources: South Norfolk Council and English Heritage


i) Percentage of dwellings built on

previously developed land

ii) Percentage of new dwellings

completed at

a) less than 30 per hectare

b) 30-50 per hectare

c) More than 50 per hectare

iii) Loss of Best Most Versatile soils

(grades 1, 2 3a)

Source: South Norfolk Council

101


i) Percentage of Broadland catchment river length assessed as good or better:

a. Overall Status; b. Ecological Status; c. Biological Status; d. General Physio Chem Status; e. Chemical class

ii) Daily domestic water use (per capita consumption)

iii)Number of planning permissions granted contrary to Environment Agency advice on water quality

Sources: Environment Agency and Anglian Water


i) Percentage of household waste

recycled/composted

ii) Kilograms of waste produced per

head of population


Social Objectives


i) Total and percentage of affordable

housing completions

ii) Total housing completions

Percentage of new public housing stock

built to the standard of the Code for

Sustainable Homes



i) Index of Multiple Deprivation score

ii) Total and percentage of affordable

housing completions

% of economically active working age

people (aged 16-64) – unemployed

Total benefit claimants - percentage of

working age people claiming benefits

Percentage of people claiming Job

Seekers Allowance who have been

doing so for a) over 1 year and b) over 2

years

Source: Norfolk County Council and South Norfolk Council, NOMIS

102

S 3 To offer opportunities for all sections of the population to have rewarding and satisfying employment

i) Amount of land development for

employment by type

ii) % of working age (16-64)

population economically active

iii) Gross weekly pay (F/T workers

Source: South Norfolk Council and Office for National Statistics, NOMIS





c) By foot or cycle


Accessibility of local GP services (15 & 30 mins walk/public transport

Source: 2011 Census/Norfolk Insight


i) Percentage of school leavers with 5

of more GCSEs A*-C

ii) Percentage of 16-18 year olds not

in employment, education or

training (NEETs)

iii) Proportion of adult population

qualified to NVQ4 level or higher

Source: Norfolk County Council and

Department for Children, Schools and

Families


Life expectancy at birth and at age 65

Percentage accessibility of leisure and recreation facilities (by ward)???

Sources: South Norfolk Council, Norfolk County Council and Office for National Statistics


Incidents of crime committed

a) Domestic burglaries

b) Violence

c) Offences against vehicles

Sources: ONS

103


General resident satisfaction levels

Source: MORI people survey

Economic Objectives


i) Amount of land developed for

employment use by type

ii) Employment/unemployment levels

iii) New business registration rate

Sources: South Norfolk Council and Office for National Statistics/ NOMIS


i) New business registration rates

ii) Number of small businesses

iii) Allocated employment land (ha)

without planning permission

Source: South Norfolk Council and Office for National Statistics





c) By foot or cycle


Source: 2011 Census


Proportion of population aged 19-63 for males and 19-59 for females qualified to at least Level 2 or higher

Source: Audit Comission

Per capita CO2 emissions in the LA area (tonnes/CO2)

Source: GOV.uk


New business registration rates

Appendix 1 – Review of Plans, Programmes and Policies

Document Title (sorted by publication date)

Relevant key objectives Relevant key targets and indicators

Implications for AAP

Issues for sustainability appraisal

INTERNATIONAL

The Rio Earth Summit, 1992 – JCS

Five separate agreements made at Summit • The Convention on Biological Diversity • The Framework Convention on Climate Change • Principles of Forest Management • The Rio Declaration on Environment and Development – 27 key principles • Agenda 21 - an action plan for developing the planet sustainably into the 21

st century.

Promotion of renewable energy & energy efficiency. Promotion of sustainable development patterns & public transport. Promotion of water efficiency. Promotion of biodiversity

Sustainability of new development patterns. Contribution to public transport. Contribution to renewable energy and efficiency. Contribution to biodiversity

Kyoto Protocol and the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, 1992 – EoEP & JCS

To achieve stabilisation of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at safe levels

UK target is set at 12.5% less than the 1990 output emission levels by 2012. (Domestic goal of 20% reduction of CO2 emissions below 1990 levels by 2010 - Climate Change – UK Programme 2000)

To encourage a reduction in greenhouse gas emissions (directly or through the use of alternatives).

Impact on greenhouse gas emissions Contribution to renewable energy and efficiency

The Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora Directive (92/43/EEC) –EoEP & JCS

To contribute towards ensuring biodiversity through the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna; designation of Special Areas of Conservation. Requirement for “appropriate assessments” to consider effects on sites of European importance.

Protection and management of biodiversity and areas of significant habitat and ecological importance.

Impact on habitats and species Development to avoid areas of particular importance Particular consideration of SACs and SPAs

European Air Quality Framework Directive (96/62/EC) (and supplementary ones) – EoEP & JCS

Maintain air quality where it is good, and improve where it is not.

Avoid detrimental impacts on air quality. Help to mitigate in designated Air Quality Management Areas.

Impact on air quality. Need to identify areas where improvement is necessary.

European Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC) – EoEP & JCS

Framework for the protection of inland, surface, transitional and coastal waters

Protection & management of water resources & environments.

Impact on water resources. Integration of different sectors. Impact upon European sites.

Appendix Page 1






EC Directive on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment (2001/42/EC)

“To provide for a high level of protection of the environment & to contribute to integration of environmental considerations into preparation of plans & programmes …. promoting sustainable development.” “Environmental assessments” should be carried out for plans which are likely to have significant effects on environment.

DPD should be accompanied by SA to ensure: Policies in plan will contribute to sustainable development.

hat there is full stakeholder & public consultation in process.

SA framework should ensure the objectives of this overarching document are covered.

Directive (2001/77/EC) Promotion of development of renewable energy sources and their use – EoEP & JCS

Promotion of development of renewable energy sources and their use

Promotion of renewable energy

Contribution to use of renewable energy

The World Summit on Sustainable Development, Johannesburg, 2002 – EoEP & JCS

International commitment to Sustainable Development: • Reverse trend in loss of natural resources, e.g. through resource efficiency • Increase renewable energy and efficiency • Reduce loss of biodiversity

Strengthen global commitments on sustainable development set out at Rio (Plan of Implementation). Agreements made to halve the 2 billion people living without clean water by 2015, set up solidarity fund to wipe out poverty, restore depleted fish stocks by 2015 & reduce species loss by 2015.

Promotion of sustainable development patterns. Promotion of renewable energy & energy efficiency. Protection and enhancement of biodiversity. Protection of natural resources. Promotion of health and economic well-being

Sustainability of new development patterns. Renewable energy and Efficiency. Biodiversity & natural resources. Minimisation of waste. Health & economic well-being

Directive on the Promotion of Biofuels and other Renewable Fuels for transport (2003/30/EC) – EoEP & JCS

Creating European wide framework for adoption of biofuels in transport fuel.

National targets of 5.75% by 2010 & 10% by 2020.

Consider infrastructure requirements for expansion in biofuels (farming, manufacture, delivery etc

Contribution to use of biofuels.

European Spatial Development Perspective - JCS

Across the regions of EU: Economic & Social cohesion. Conservation & management of natural resources & cultural heritage. More balanced

competitiveness.

Management of economic, social & environmental matters

Balancing of potentially conflicting economic, social & environmental issues.

Appendix Page 2






NATIONAL

PPG16 Archaeology and Planning (1993) - JCS

Ensure archaeological remains are not needlessly or thoughtlessly destroyed Presumption in favour of physical preservation of nationally important remains and their setting

Consider and address archaeological interests.

Impact on archaeology

PPG15 Planning and the Historic Environment (1994) – EoEP & JCS

Effective protection for all aspects of the historic environment

Identify, protect and enhance the historic environment

Impact on historic environment Contribution to enhancement and restoration

PPG24 Planning and Noise (1994) – EoEP & JCS

Minimise the adverse impacts of noise

Consider risk of impacts from noise to/from development

Risks of noise impacts

Planning (Control of Major Accident Hazards) Regulations (implements obligations under Seveso II Directive Council Directive 96/82/EC) - JCS

Prevent major accidents from hazardous substances & limit their consequences

Consider location of establishments where hazardous substances are used or stored. Issue of development within vicinity of hazardous substance zones.

Consideration of hazardous substances & impact on health & environment

Saving Lives: Our Healthier Nation White Paper (1999) – JCS

An action plan to improve the health of everyone, focusing on particular illnesses

Consider how LDF can contribute to improved health

Contribution to health

DfT 10 year Transport Plan (2000) To tackle congestion & pollution by improving all types of transport in ways that increase choice. Based on:

integrated transport

public and private partnership

new projects.

Relevant targets: 10% increase in bus journeys to 2010. Bus priority schemes. Improve links to deprived urban areas. More park & ride schemes. Safer cycling & walking routes more 20mph areas & Home Zones

Promote integrated transport as part of sustainable development.

Contribution to achieving modal shift to sustainable forms of transport.

Rural White Paper: Our Countryside (2000) – EoEP & JCS

Sustain and enhance the distinctive environment, economy and social fabric of the English countryside for the benefit of all.

Consider contribution to environmental, social & economic life of rural areas

Contribution to rural environment, economy and community

Urban White Paper- Our Towns Urban areas that offer a high quality of life and opportunity for Consider the means for Contribution to urban environment,

Appendix Page 3






and Cities: The Future (2000) - JCS

all. Urban renaissance should benefit everyone, making towns & cities vibrant & successful, & protecting the countryside from development pressure. Promotes: • Community involvement • Good sustainable design and planning • Prosperous and inclusive cities • Good quality services • Protection from crime

contributing to the environmental, social and economic fabric of the urban area

economy and social well-being

PPG8 Telecommunications (2001) – EoEP & JCS

Facilitate the growth of new and existing telecommunication systems whilst keeping environmental impact to a minimum.

Provide for telecomms development, having regard to environmental impacts & technical constraints

Contribution to telecommunications system development and sustainability

PPG13 Transport (2001) – EoEP & JCS

Promote more sustainable transport choices for people and freight. Promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling. Reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

National maximum parking standards (Annex D)

Promote development in sustainable locations (good accessibility by walking, cycling and public transport)

Accessibility of development links to jobs, services etc)

PPG17 Planning for open space, sport and recreation (2002) – EoEP & JCS

Local networks of high quality and well managed and maintained open spaces, sports and recreational facilities and the maintenance of an adequate supply.

Local standards to be set

Assess recreational needs, set standards, protect and enhance appropriate provision

Impact / contribution on recreational provision

Air Quality Strategy for England etc (Jan 2000 + Feb. 2003 addendum) – EoEP & JCS

Improve air quality to protect people's health & environment without imposing unacceptable economic or social costs. Objectives for nine main air pollutants.

Consider policies that encourage reduction in air pollutants

Assess likely implications on air quality / pollutants

Energy White Paper: Our Energy Future – creating a low carbon economy (2003) – JCS

Long term strategic vision for energy policy, combining environmental security of supply, competitiveness and social goals.

Promotion of sustainable energy, energy efficiency

Consider sustainable energy issues

Rural Strategy 2004 - JCS Economic and Social Regeneration – Supporting enterprise across rural England, but targeting greater resources at areas of greatest need; Social Justice for All – tackling rural social exclusion and providing fair access to services & opportunities for rural people. Enhancing the countryside – protecting the natural environment.

Consider means for contributing to environmental, social & economic fabric of rural areas.

Contribution to rural environment, economy and social well-being

ODPM Safer Places: The Planning System and Crime Prevention (2004)

Early consideration of crime prevention as part of the design process to deliver safer places.

Contribution to reduction of crime rates.

Ensure policies take account of the need to consider & design out crime.

Contribution to designing out / reducing crime.

PPS7 Sustainable Development Strictly control new housing in the open countryside. Promote sustainable Protection of countryside &

Appendix Page 4






in Rural Areas (2004) – EoEP & JCS (partially superseded by PPS4)

Protect character of rural settlements & sites with specific landscape, wildlife & historic value. Local landscape designations need to be rigorously justified. Support appropriate agricultural development/diversification. Protect most valuable agricultural land.

economic activity development in rural areas. Protect countryside, rural character & specific sites. Protect agricultural land.

environmental assets. Sustainable economic development in rural areas. Protection of soil resources.

PPS22 Renewable Energy (2004) – EoEP & JCS

Increased development of renewable energy resources

20% of UK electricity to be from renewables by 2020

Promotion of renewable energy. Set criteria for renewable energy projects,

Contribution to renewable energy provision

PPS23 Planning and Pollution Control (2004) – EoEP & JCS

Protecting and improving the natural environment, public health and safety, and amenity

Consider risks from pollution, balance with other factors

Risks / impact from pollution

PPS9 Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (2005) – JCS

Biological and geological diversity are conserved and enhanced as part of sustainable development. Conserve, enhance and restore diversity of wildlife and geology. Contribute to rural renewal and urban renaissance (taking account of biodiversity's role in quality of life and high quality environments).

Identify, protect and enhance biodiversity and important geology

Impact on biodiversity (habitats and species) and geology. Contribution to enhancement and restoration

Securing the Future - the UK Sustainable Development Strategy 2005 - JCS

A sustainable, innovative & productive economy that delivers high levels of employment & a just society that promotes social inclusion, sustainable communities and personal well-being; done in ways that protect and enhance the physical and natural environment, and use resources and energy as efficiently as possible.

Promotion of sustainable economy & communities. Protect & enhance environment, promote resource and energy efficiency.

Contribution to: Economic objectives Sustainable communities Impact on / enhancement of environment Resource efficiency & energy efficiency

PPS 1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2005) + Supplement Planning & Climate Change (Dec 2006) – EoEP & JCS

Delivery of sustainable development – inc. use of resources and reduction of GHG emissions. Contribute to Climate Change Programme, energy policies and sustainability. Provide homes, jobs, services, infrastructure, reduce emissions, efficient use of resources, resilience to climate change. Deliver sustainable patterns of urban and rural growth, maximising public transport and reducing need to travel (esp. by car). Promote social cohesion & inclusion. Conserve & enhance biodiversity (inc. impacts of climate change)

Consider how development can contribute towards all aspects of sustainable development, respond to challenges of climate change.

Overall consideration of sustainability and tackling climate change issues e.g. sustainable energy, flooding, biodiversity, locational strategy, accessibility, travel, economic and community development

Appendix Page 5






Reflect development needs & interests of community and business. Enable them to contribute effectively. Encourage competitiveness & innovation

PPS3 Housing (2006) - JCS Ensure that everyone has opportunity to live in a decent home, which they can afford, in a community where they want to live: To achieve a wide choice of high quality homes, both affordable & market housing, to address community needs. Widen opportunities for home ownership & ensure high quality housing for those who cannot afford market housing, particularly for vulnerable or in need. To improve affordability across housing market, inc. by increasing supply. To create sustainable, inclusive, mixed communities in both urban & rural areas.

Provide for housing development that is sustainable as regards location, layout & design and meets the needs of the community.

Contribution to meeting housing requirement (market and affordable) Sustainability & choice of locations. Efficient use and management of land Quality of design. Contribution to inclusive communities

Good Practice Guide on Planning for Tourism (May 2006) - JCS

Maximising the economic, social and environmental benefits of tourism, and achieving these in most sustainable manner.

Promote sustainable tourism

Contribution to tourism. Impact on economy, environment & social issues

Code for Sustainable Homes: A step-change in sustainable home building practice. (2006) - JCS

Minimum standards for • Energy and Carbon Dioxide emissions • Water consumption • Materials used • Surface water run-off • Waste • Pollution • Health and well-being • Management • Ecology

Move towards improved environmental standards to minimize impact on environment & improve social well-being & health from home occupation. Consider how housing can enhance the environment & create a healthy living environment for residents.

Impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Contribution to renewable energy and efficiency. Contribution to water conservation. Making best use of resources. Minimising waste & increasing recycling. Minimising impacts from pollution. Contribution to community well-being. Improving health of residents. Improved security / minimised crime. Contribution to enhanced biodiversity.

UK Climate Change Programme (latest version March 2006) – EoEP & JCS

Strategy for climate change, reducing emissions that contribute to climate change and adaptation to climate change

Sets out how energy efficiency will save 10.2 million tonnes of carbon (MtC) per year by 2010. Savings will be split between business (5.1MtC)

Consider means for reducing emissions and designing / locating development that deals with the risks from climate change

Impact on greenhouse gas emissions. Contribution to renewable energy & efficiency Risks of flooding

Appendix Page 6






& household (4.8MtC) and public sectors (0.3MtC).

Energy Review 2006 - JCS Tackle climate change by reducing CO2 & to deliver secure, clean energy at affordable prices, as we move to increasing dependence on imported energy

Energy Savings of 6-9 MtC by 2020 (this is on top of savings –12 MtC - announced in the Climate Change Programme of 2006 by 2010)

Promotion of energy efficiency, more efficient transport, distributed energy generation, renewable energy, security of supply.

Contribution to sustainable energy development and use

Local Government White Paper 2006 – Strong and Prosperous Communities - JCS

Responsive services & empowered Communities. Effective, accountable & responsive local government. Strong cities and strategic regions Local government as strategic leader and placeshaper. Performance framework. Efficiency in transforming local services. Community cohesion.

Consider how spatial planning can contribute to better communities

Contribution to community well-being

PPS12 Local Spatial Planning (2008)

Government policies on local spatial planning and LDF preparation.

Sets out key ingredients of local spatial planning and how local authorities should prepare them.

To ensure all the requirements of PPS are met through both contents and the procedures plan preparation.

Fundamental tenet of plan preparation

State of the Countryside Report (2008)

Provides information and health check on themes and issues faced by rural communities

Develop plans/proposals that respond to needs of rural communities and countryside issues

Consider contribution towards: Access to services, Sustainable transport, Community involvement, Affordable housing, Environment / countryside

PPS25 Development and Flood Risk (2006) + 2009 supplement - JCS

Avoid flood risk where possible (sequential test), manage and reduce risk, avoid increasing flood risk

Consider & limit risks of flooding, avoid locating development in areas at risk where possible, reduce flood-risks.

Risks of flooding

PPS4 Planning for Sustainable Economic Development (2009)

Proactive and flexible development plan policies that emphasise sustainable development, stresses importance of

Positive approach towards sustainable economic

Contribution towards economic development in existing centres and

Appendix Page 7






towns & cities, protecting the countryside but promoting appropriate development in rural areas for employment, tourism & leisure activities (e.g. conversion, re-use and replacement buildings & farm diversification) Need to:

Set out clear economic vision & strategy,

Assess ‘need’

Support existing businesses,

Set out management of & growth of centres,

Plan for new or emerging sectors as well as the knowledge/hi-tech industry

Prioritise use of previously developed land

Reassess existing allocations

Identify local service centres, network/hierarchy of town centres (including primary & secondary frontages) + range of sites for economic development

Deliver sustainable transport

Set maximum parking standards

Set floorspace threshold for edge of centre and out of centre

Manage evening & night time economy

Monitor - network & hierarchy of centres, need for further development, vitality & viability of centres.

development – including tourism & leisure. Continued emphasis on town & service centres, protection of countryside and appropriate economic development in rural areas.

rural areas. Provision of jobs & employment opportunities. Sustainability of proposals (re-use, conversions, diversification) Protection of countryside

PPS 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (2010)

Recognise that heritage assets are a valuable non-renewable resource. Need to maintain information on assets and their significance & contribution to area & sense of place. Need positive, proactive approach to conservation of historic assets.

Need to consider proposals in light of proximity to historic assets, any impact upon them and with regard to their level of significance.

Contribution to built environment in urban & rural areas. Contributes to distinctiveness of landscape & townscapes.

Consultation draft of PPS 1 supplement: Planning for a Low Carbon Future in a Changing Climate (2010)

Planning should fully support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate by • shaping places to help secure radical cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. This requires the location and layout of new development to be planned to deliver the highest viable energy efficiency, including through the use of decentralized energy, reducing the need to travel, and the fullest possible use of sustainable transport. • actively support and help drive the delivery of renewable and

Continued emphasis on low carbon development, renewable energy and imperative need to respond to challenges of climate change

Contribution to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, renewable energy, and impacts of climate change.

Appendix Page 8






low carbon energy. • shape places and secure new development so as to minimise vulnerability and provide resilience to impacts arising from climate change, and do so in ways consistent with cutting greenhouse gas emissions. • ensure local communities are given real opportunities to take positive action on climate change; in particular by encouraging community-led initiatives to reduce energy use and secure more renewable and low-carbon energy.

Consultation draft of PPS: Planning for a Natural and Healthy Environment (2010)

Need to conserve & enhance natural environment, inc. quality, character & value of landscape, biodiversity, geodiversity & soil within rural & urban areas by ensuring that: –– natural environment is integrated into strategic vision of communities –– policies & decisions are based on an understanding of the nature, extent & value of the natural environment & recognise its importance; and –– development & regeneration has minimal impacts on biodiversity & should enhance it wherever possible to contribute to the overall aim of no net loss to biodiversity. • minimise vulnerability of places, people & wildlife to the impacts of climate change & contribute to effective climate change adaptation measures by maintaining, creating and improving networks of green infrastructure within both urban and rural areas • deliver safe & attractive places to live, which respect the areas character, promote health & wellbeing, & reduce social inequalities by ensuring peoples access to high quality open spaces, green infrastructure & sports & play spaces & facilities which are safely & easily accessible by walking, cycling or public transport • provide access & appropriate recreational opportunities in rural areas to enable urban & rural dwellers to enjoy wider countryside.

Need to ensure up to date data available on natural environment, habitats and green infrastructure and open space etc. when preparing LDF. Need to consider how best to conserve and enhance areas assets and develop strategy to address deficiencies.

Consider impacts upon biodiversity and environmental quality and townscapes/landscapes. Access to environment, promotion of healthy and active populations, provision of high quality local environment.

Sustainable Communities Plan:

Ensure all social tenants have a decent home Ensure all

Provision of housing for all

Contribution to:

Appendix Page 9






Building for the future – EoEP & JCS

communities have a clean, safe & attractive environment. Ensure that existing housing stock standards are improved. Tackle the housing shortage - more homes of right type in the right place; address the needs for more affordable housing; make best use of existing housing stock. Work towards a better balance in housing market in longer term. Ensure communities are sustainable, the environment is enhanced and countryside protected. Protect the countryside and enhance its quality, avoiding urban sprawl. Address the housing needs of rural communities. Alleviate pressures on services & housing caused by economic success where these pressures cannot readily be dealt with within existing towns and cities. Ensure new & expanded communities are sustainable, well-designed, high quality and attractive places in which people will positively choose to live & work.

sectors of the community. Promote good community Environments & improved housing standards. Housing that meets the needs of community, in type & location, whilst protecting environment. Encourage brownfield development. Protect & enhance the countryside. Provide for rural housing needs Provide for adequate levels of housing & service development. Apply aims of sustainable development to new / expanded communities

Meet housing requirement. Environmental quality. Housing suitability. Appropriateness of type and sustainability of location. Efficient use/management of land. Impact on / contribution to Environment. Impact on countryside. Meet rural housing needs. Services requirement. Sustainability of policies and proposals

Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010

To contribute towards ensuring biodiversity through the conservation of natural habitats and of wild flora and fauna; designation of Special Areas of Conservation. Requirement for “appropriate assessments” to consider effects on sites of European importance.

Protection and management of biodiversity and areas of significant habitat and ecological importance.

Impact on habitats and species Development to avoid areas of particular importance Particular consideration of SACs and SPAs

National Planning Policy Framework (2012) Supersedes PPS and PPG document outlined above

12 Core Planning Principles:

To be genuinely plan-led empowering local people to shape their surroundings….;

Not simply be about scrutiny but instead be a creative exercise in finding ways to enhance and improve the places in which people live their lives;

Proactively drive and support sustainable economic development…..;

Always seek to secure high quality design and a good standard of amenity ……;

Take account of the different roles and character of different areas, promoting vitality of main urban areas, protecting green belts……..;

Support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate……;

Contribute to conserving and enhancing the natural environment and reducing pollution…….;

Building a strong, competitive economy Ensuring the vitality of town centres Supporting a prosperous rural economy Promoting sustainable transport Supporting high quality communications infrastructure Delivering a wide choice of high quality homes Requiring good design Promoting healthy communities Protecting Green Belt land

Housing need Economic development Infrastructure provision Conservation of natural environment Conservation of the historic environment Viability and deliverability

Appendix Page 10






Encourage the effective use of land by reusing land that has been previously developed…….;

Promote mixed use developments and encourage multiple benefits from the use of land in urban and rural areas……;

Conserve heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance…….;

Actively manage patterns of growth to make the fullest possible use of public transport, walking and cycling…….;

Take account of and support local strategies to improve health, social and cultural wellbeing for all…….

Meeting the challenge of climate change and flooding Conserving and enhancing the natural environment Conserving and enhancing the historic environment

Localism Act (2011) Main measures of the Localism Act:

New freedoms and flexibilities for local government

New rights and powers for communities and individuals

Reform to make the planning system more democratic and more effective

Reform to ensure that decisions about housing are taken locally

Abolition of regional strategies A Duty to Cooperate Neighbourhood Planning Neighbourhood Development Orders Community right to build Requirement for developers to consult local communities Reform the way local plans are made

Housing targets Duty to Cooperate Neighbourhood Plans

National Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) (2014)

The Planning Practice Guidance supports the National Planning Policy Framework. Areas of particular relevance to the LSAAP relate to:

Air quality (plans should take in to account air quality management areas, air quality is a consideration in the SEA, sustainable transport, need to establish a baseline in Local Plans).

Climate change (mitigating and adapting to climate change).

Conserving and enhancing the historic environment (positive strategy for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment, identify specific opportunities in the area for the conservation an enhancement of the historic environment.

Design (design quality should be secured through local plan policy, design guides/codes are supported, local character, safety, crime prevention, security, access, inclusion, natural resources and

Supporting the key objectives of the NPPF.

Housing need Economic development Infrastructure provision Conservation of natural environment Conservation of the historic environment Viability and deliverability

Appendix Page 11






cohesive communities should be considered, encourage a robust relationship between town centers and variable uses such as travel option, hosing, activities, safe walking and cycling routes, transport stops).

Duty to cooperate (as part of the Local Plan process).

Ensuring the vitality of town center’s (town centre first approach, generate local employment; improve the quality of parking, sequential tests).

Flood risk (strategic flood risk assessment the application of a sequential approach).

Health and wellbeing (promoted through Local Plan policy).

Local Plans (preparation in accordance with legislation, clear justification to undertaking an AAP).

Minerals (safeguarding minerals resources)

Natural environment (strategic policies for the conservation and enhancement of the natural environment, encouraged use of landscape character assessments, plan positively for biodiversity and green infrastructure, consider agricultural land classifications).

Open space, sports and recreation, public rights of way and green space (assess need, protection and provision).

Rural housing (encourage thriving rural community).

SEA & SA (both are required for the AAP).

Viability (use of viability assessment to ensure that plan policies are viable).

Water supply, waste water and water quality (encourage discussions with water and sewerage companies; encourage a catchment based approach, sufficient capacity within the waste infrastructure, EU water framework directive).

Appendix Page 12






REGIONAL

A Sustainable Development Framework for the East of England (EERA, 2001) – EoEP & JCS

High level objectives: To achieve sustainable levels of prosperity and economic growth. To deliver more sustainable patterns of location of development, including employment and housing. To protect and maintain our most valuable regional assets such as designated habitats, landscapes of natural beauty, and our historic built heritage, and to improve the wider environment by means of adequate investment and management. To reduce our consumption of fossil fuels. To achieve a more equitable sharing of the benefits of prosperity across all sectors of society & fairer access to services, focusing on deprived areas in the region. To use natural resources (finite & Renewable) efficiently as possible, re-use or recycled alts wherever possible. Minimise production of by-products or wastes, aiming for "closed systems". To avoid using the global environment to underwrite our own unsustainable way of life (eg. dependence on unsustainably produced and/or transported food imports or timber). To revitalise town centres to promote a return to sustainable urban living.

Promote sustainable development, inc. location & urban living. Protect and enhance environmental assets. Promote resource and energy efficiency. Improve access to jobs, services & facilities.

Sustainability of development. Impact on environment. Impact on resources. Contribution to energy efficiency & renewable energy. Accessibility of development.

Appendix Page 13






Woodland for Life – Regional Woodland strategy for the East of England (Nov. 2003) – EoEP & JCS

Improve the lives of individuals and the places in which they live and work. Add to general economy of region, with woodland economy providing wide range of social & environmental benefits. The use of wood as an alternative source of energy to fossil fuels. Deliver wider societal benefits using woodlands as resources for learning. A high quality natural environment that is protected and enhanced.

Consider the retention and enhancement of woodland for its contribution to social, economic & environmental factors

Impact on, or contribution to enhancement of, woodlands

Sustainable Communities in the East of England (2003) - JCS

Creation of sustainable communities, addressing housing, planning and neighbourhood renewal issues.

Encourage creation of sustainable communities

Contribution towards community well-being

Our Environment, Our Future. Regional Environmental Strategy for East of England EERA (2003)

Vision: A wealthy & inclusive region which recognises value of environment to sustainable development. Agenda: to celebrate, protect & enhance East of England’s natural, historic & built environment. Importance of environment Green space – health & recreation investment. Regeneration focus through repair & conservation of built environment. Priorities & strategic aims. Development should promote: • good design • protection of the historic environment • sustainable transport • enhanced environment • addressing of climate change issues (including energy efficiency) • enhanced biodiversity • sustainable lifestyles (including understanding of environmental issues).

Protection for range of existing assets, improve access to them and create new assets where possible.

Contribution to built, historic and environmental assets. Access to environment. Responds to challenges of climate change. Biodiversity

Sustainable Tourism Strategy for the East of England (2004) - JCS

Achievement of tourism goals in a sustainable manner

Encourage sustainable tourism Contribution to sustainable tourism

Appendix Page 14






Economic Strategy for the East of England EEDA (2004)

1. Skills base that can support a worldclass economy: 2. Growing competitiveness, productivity and entrepreneurship: 3.Promoting Technology and research industries 4. High quality places to work and live: 5. Social inclusion and participation: 6. Development of international gateways: 7. A leading information society. 8. Exemplar in efficient use of resources.

Encourage development of skills & training. Encourage competitiveness & specialisms. Promote high quality work & home environments. Accessible economic opportunities. Socially inclusive. Maximise opportunities from overseas & use of technology. Efficient resource use.

Contribution to economic development. Access to employment (transport and skills) Diverse economy. Sustainable economic development. Efficient use of resources.

Sustainable Futures: The Integrated Regional strategy for the East of England (2005) - JCS

Priorities include: Achieving high quality and sustainable solutions in areas facing growth and regeneration pressures. Harness strengths in science, R & D. Address persistent deprivation & social exclusion. Use and manage resources and environmental assets efficiently. Sustainable management of transport infrastructure.

Ensure that priorities are addressed in an integrated and sustainable manner.

Identification and consideration of conflicts. Contribution to sustainable development and construction. Contribution to quality of life.

Appendix Page 15






East of England Social Strategy (2007)

“Society has duty to ensure decent standard of living for everyone & prevent damaging inequalities in health & life chances in general. Tackle poverty & reduce income inequalities. Promote access to work, tackle low pay & improve conditions. Improve life chances of children/young people from disadvantaged families. Improve life chances of adults through learning / skills development. Promote active ageing & reduce exclusion of elderly. Support development of sustainable communities. Improve access to services. Develop social networks, promote community cohesion. Tackle poverty. Interventions related to planning: Public transport, Housing, Design, Regeneration, Community involvement in decision-making. Key actions: Support development of community & social enterprises. Delivery of affordable & decent homes. Actively promote development of strategic networks of green space. Promote policies for the closer location of homes, jobs & services & better accessibility through public transport, cycling & walking.

Address issues of: Respond to strategic objectives. Inequality in health & life chances. Promoting social inclusion. Promote economic activity to raise average incomes. Help address issue of community cohesion. Involve all sections of community in decision-making.

Consider issues of: Strategic objectives & social issues. Health & life chances. Social inclusion. Low income.

Appendix Page 16






East of England Plan Regional Spatial Strategy (2008) – JCS Note: This document has since been revoked by the Secretary of State

To reduce the region’s impact on, and exposure to the effects of climate change. To increase housing opportunities for people in the region. To realise the economic potential of the region and its people. To improve the quality of life for the region’s people. To improve and conserve the region’s environment

Locate development to reduce need for travel. Major shift towards public transport, walking & cycling + away from car use. Maximise energy efficiency of development + promote use of renewable & low carbon energy. Reduce risk of damage from flooding. Secure delivery of additional housing. Give priority to affordable housing. Facilitate development to support business, improve skills & opportunities. Provide job growth. Ensure adequate & sustainable transport infrastructure. Deliver sustainable communities. Promote social cohesion & access to services & facilities. Maintain cultural diversity. Promote regen & renewal of disadvantaged areas. Increase community involvement in implementation. Ensure protection & enhancement of environmental assets e.g. historic environment, & landscape. Re-use previously developed land + seek environment & development gains from undeveloped land. Protect + enhance biodiversity by protection of habitats and species + creating new. Provide network of multi-function accessible grenspace. Reduce the demand for & use of water & other natural resources + reduce waste & increase its sustainable management.

Accessibility of development Contribution to more sustainable modes of travel Contribution to energy efficiency Contribution to use of renewable / low carbon energy Risks of flooding Contribution to housing provision Contribution to affordable housing Contribution to economic provision Sustainability of development locations Contribution to strategic infrastructure Contribution to sustainable transport infrastructure Contribution to social infrastructure Protection of & contribution to green infrastructure Contribution to accessibility for all Contribution to cultural diversity Contribution to regeneration and renewal Contribution to community involvement Impact on environmental assets Impact on / enhancement of countryside & the environment

Appendix Page 17






Norfolk, Suffolk and Cambridgeshire Strategic Health Authority Health Strategy 2005 – 2010 - JCS

Vision People choosing healthier lifestyles. People fully involved in decisions about their healthcare. Better quality care, with safe, more effective treatment tailored to the individual. Services delivered locally with more support at home & in community & less time in hospital. Improved health outcomes for vulnerable groups and reduced inequalities. Efficient and effective use of available resources to deliver

sustainable services.

Consider the issue of promoting healthier lifestyles and provision of facilities

Contribution to healthy lifestyles and provision of facilities

Living with Climate Change in the East of England – EoEP & JCS

Key messages: By planning ahead we can avoid the worst impacts & take advantage of opportunities. Climate change will create opportunities as well as threats eg tourism. Business activity will be significantly affected. The "northern heartland", which includes the Greater Norwich Area, is the least vulnerable area in the East of England (with fluvial flooding and agricultural impacts likely being the most significant impacts). Planning policies should influence the location and design of new buildings to minimise vulnerability to climate change. Address impacts on economic development. Adapt properties to make them more resilient to flood damage and ensure siting does not exacerbate flood risk. Improve ventilation, cooling and shading in properties. Include Water conservation measures. Create well-shaded green spaces.

Consider and limit risks of flooding. Promote good design that addresses climate change (eg flood risk, ventilation, shading).

Risks of flooding. Contribution to quality of design / sustainable construction.

Appendix Page 18






East of England Plan: Single issue review ‘Planning for Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation in the East of England’ (2009)

Need for best available evidence & professional judgement to respond to accommodation needs of Gypsy and Travellers.

Draft policy H.4 requires at least 1,187 net additional pitches to 2011 (66% increase on existing permitted sites).

Need to identify & respond to Gypsy & Traveller accommodation.

Reduce poverty & social exclusion Improve health, well-being, education & skills, cohesive communities and access to jobs & services. Ability to live in decent home.

Water resources for the future: a strategy for the Anglian Region – EoEP & JCS

Abstraction of water that is environmentally & economically sustainable, providing right amount of water for people, agriculture, commerce and industry & an improved water-related environment.

Availability of water supply. Limit impacts on the water resource.

Impact on water resource (supply and environment) Contribution to water efficiency

Broadland Rivers Catchment Abstraction Management Strategy – JCS

Manage water to ensure that it is available for abstraction whilst protecting the needs of the natural environment

Consider the implications for the water resource.

Impacts on water resource (supply and environment)

Broadland Rivers Catchment Flood Management Plan - JCS

Reduce flood risk to people, especially vulnerable groups, property and infrastructure. Reduce risk to life from flooding. Reduce disruption to major transport links, essential infrastructure & communities. Restore, protect and where possible improve nature conservation sites of international importance. Protect and where possible improve recreation and fisheries resources. Extend navigation where appropriate. Protect and improve sustainable water abstraction schemes. Maintain and increase connectivity of the river and floodplain. Restore new areas of functional flood plain and improve in-stream features. Meet river quality objectives and standards. Protect designated cultural heritage features from flooding, where possible.

Consider the implications of flood risk for development, avoiding risks where possible and enabling improvements

Risks of flooding. Contribution to reducing risks and impacts of flooding

Appendix Page 19






LOCAL

South Norfolk Crime Reduction Strategy (2003) - JCS

Strategic Priorities: Burglary + Vehicle-related crime + Crimes of violence: Public and Domestic Partnerships give strategic importance to violent crime & disorder. As issues surrounding domestic violence differ from violent crime these were given distinct priority status.

Consider issue of crime & links with promoting reduced crime through good design & need for early liaison with Police.

Contribution to improving quality of where people live Reducing anti-social activity. Encouraging local community identity, good behaviour & and co-operative attitudes

South Norfolk Corporate Equality Plan (2003) - JCS

AIMING FOR EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY “Putting People First” ensure that views & priorities of all citizens are reflected in Council policies. Aim to ensure that equality included in day-to-day work delivering services & in our role as employer. To achieve that, the Council will: Make our services & information about them accessible to all. Ensure, where appropriate, that we work in partnership with others to deliver equality. Meet our statutory requirements. Ensure that employees are treated fairly. Ensure policy development & planning recognise importance of equalities.

Reflect equalities issues

Contribution to equality

South Norfolk Empty Homes Strategy (2003) - JCS

Objectives and targets - bringing empty homes back into productive use for benefit of South Norfolk’s residents will assist in: Reduce number of unfit dwellings. Contribute to revitalisation of market towns. Increasing supply of affordable housing. Increase provision of rented properties for those without homes.

Contribution to housing provision

Contribution to providing everybody with opportunity of a decent home.

Norfolk Biodiversity Action Plan 2004 - JCS

Conservation of species and habitats in Norfolk, inc. action plans

Protect and enhance the natural environment (habitats and species)

Impact on biodiversity

Biodiversity SPG for Norfolk (2004)

Need to consider biodiversity issues as integral & at earliest stage of planning e.g. site species/habitat surveys. Gives advice on protection, enhancement & mitigation.

Opportunities for species protection & habitat creation & enhancement.

Consider impacts on biodiversity

Appendix Page 20






The Broads Plan 2004 - JCS The Broads will be promoted as national park, accessible to people of all abilities & social backgrounds to enjoy in quiet & environmentally sustainable ways that are in keeping with its distinctive natural & cultural beauty & that are appropriate to a nationally & internationally protected area. Tranquillity & wildness of area protected & enhanced. Information will be readily accessible. Tourism will be of a high standard, contributing to local communities etc. Water resources will be managed sustainably to ensure the proper functioning of the wetland system. Archaeological features will be identified and safeguarded; the Broads distinctiveness will be restored, enhanced & protected; good design & sustainable construction will be encouraged. Waterways will be maintained & enhanced. Land-based access protected & enhanced. Precautionary measures will be taken to prevent environmental degradation. Management will be informed by scientific knowledge. Economic & social development will focus on sustaining thriving rural communities through key sectors e.g. tourism, marine industry & agriculture. Impacts of climate change will be managed sustainably over the longer term. The flood plain will be managed sustainably to alleviate flooding in the Broads.

Consider the implications of potential effects on the Broads Area & contributions to the achievement of the Broads Plan

Impacts on the Broads Area & its management

South Norfolk Economic Development Strategy (2004) - JCS

The Vision for 2009 for South Norfolk’s Economy is: “To be an area where economic opportunity & development is diverse, sustainable & accessible to all the community.” Stimulate creation & retention of all employment in South Norfolk. Raise learning expectation & achievements. Meet needs of economy. Break down the barriers to economic success in rural areas

Economic development, allowing new developments. Consider accessibility issues. Effects on rural communities.

Sustained economic Growth. Contribution to encouraging indigenous & inward investment. Opportunities for all sections of population to have rewarding & satisfying employment. Improving education & skills of the population. Improving economic performance in rural area.

Appendix Page 21






South Norfolk Tourism Strategy (2004) - JCS

Plan to achieve: 1. Increase income from tourism. 2. We will encourage more accommodation providers & attractions to meet quality standards with a series of initiatives 3. The South Norfolk tourism profile will be improved to increase the number of visitors. 4. Responding to the industry’s requests, partners will promote schemes to extend the season, retain skills & encourage investment 5. Involve all tourism partnerships & communities in marketing of destinations, events & themes in South Norfolk. 6. Help local tourism businesses to promote & identify themselves to public. Development of tourism in South Norfolk will enhance the natural and built environment.

Reflect locations of tourist activities. Built & natural environment is key factor.

Contribution to sustained economic growth. Contribution to maintaining & enhancing distinctiveness & quality of landscapes & townscapes. Contribution to conserving & enhancing historic environment.

Gypsies and Travellers Strategy for Norfolk (2005-2008) - JCS

A Norfolk where Gypsies & Travellers have equality of opportunity with other communities to enable them to access services provided by agencies working together in an inclusive, cohesive & transparent manner.

Address the identified need of Gypsy and Traveller communities

Reduction of social exclusion & contribution to quality of life for all

Greater Norwich Housing Strategy (2005 – 2010) - JCS

Balancing the housing market. Increasing the supply of affordable housing. Tackling homelessness more effectively. Making best use of existing housing stock. Supporting independent living.

Provide for housing requirements (for all sectors of population)

Contribution to housing provision (market & social)

South Norfolk Leisure/Culture & Countryside Strategy (2006-2016) - JCS

The achievement & improvement of health and well-being & creating a sense of place & community.

Ensure adequate provision of facilities & protection & enhancement of environment. Links to community development.

Maintaining distinctiveness of environment. Reduction in social exclusion. Accessibility to services.

Towards Stronger Communities: South Norfolk’s Strategy for Community Cohesion (Oct 2006) - JCS

Everyone has sense of belonging & shares common values Those from different backgrounds have similar life opportunities Diversity of people’s backgrounds & circumstances is appreciated & valued. Mutual respect for differing opinions & views Strong & positive relationships are being developed from different backgrounds.

Consider issue of community cohesion & social inclusion

Contribution to local community identity, good behaviour & co-operative attitudes.

Appendix Page 22






Local Transport Plan for Norfolk 2006 – 2011 (inc. Transport Strategy to 2021) - JCS

Improve strategic accessibility to reduce Remoteness & improve economic performance. Reduce need to travel by balancing jobs & housing growth. Improve connections by road & particularly public transport. Make house & jobs growth more sustainable, by locating it to minimise need to travel, especially by car. Improve local connections & promote better accessibility to jobs & services, especially by public transport, cycling & walking. Prioritise improvements in more deprived areas. Reduce delays to people & traffic + focus interventions on worst congestion areas - by improving efficiency of transport network & reducing car use. Reduce emissions by enabling a shift to alternative fuels & low emission vehicles. Protect the environment. Reduce casualties. Increase focus on safer road user behaviour. Reduce danger for cyclists & pedestrians. Recognises Norwich area as a focus for growth. Supports Norwich's role as a Regional Interchange Centre and role of market towns; links between Norwich & market towns being of particular importance. Within the built up area, the Norwich Area Transportation Strategy is carried forward, including extending pedestrian dominated area of city-centre + promoting travel choice & accessibility into & within area by all modes. Recognises role of market towns as service centres. Will seek to: Improve role as interchange centres & within towns, improve walking & cycling. Remove traffic from town centres where possible, promote vibrant public spaces & thriving local economies to serving rural hinterland. Proposed major schemes include Norwich Northern Distributor Road.

Consider need for strategic transport improvements related to development. Consider accessibility for development & need for local transport improvements. Focus development on accessible locations where need to travel is reduced, providing for transport improvements where necessary. Reduce need for travel. Require road safety measures / improvements where appropriate. Provide for / require necessary transport infrastructure improvements. Provide for / require necessary transport infrastructure improvements. Provide for strategic transport infrastructure.

Accessibility of development / location and links to jobs and services. Impact on road safety. Contribution to transport infrastructure. Contribution to strategic transport infrastructure.

Appendix Page 23






Joint Municipal Waste Management Strategy for Norfolk 2006 – 2020 - JCS

To reduce the growth in municipal waste by promoting waste reduction and reuse initiatives; Promote waste awareness through public education & awareness campaigns; Increase recycling & composting of waste to achieve statutory performance standards & national recycling and recovery standards; Progressively increase the recovery & diversion of biodegradable waste from landfill in accordance with Landfill Allowance Trading Scheme; Deliver an efficient, effective & affordable waste management service that promotes the implementation of the most practical, social, environmental & economically acceptable solutions; Procure appropriate technologies to manage & treat residual municipal waste; Ensure that way residual waste is treated will support practices higher up waste hierarchy; Minimise as far as possible the residual waste requiring treatment & final disposal; Norfolk Authorities will work together to achieve the Objectives and Actions within the waste management strategy.

Improve the rates of waste recovery and recycling and re-use. To reduce the amount of waste produced at the beginning of the waste chain. To ensure that waste collections and treatment processes are sustainable and able to cater for the new growth from housing and employment. To utilise the waste treatment process as an important opportunity for employment generation.

To improve environmental amenity, including air quality; To make the best use of resources, including land and energy and to minimise waste production; To offer more opportunities for rewarding and satisfying employment for all; To improve the quality of where people live; To improve the social and environmental performance of the economy.

The Broads Authority Local Development Framework Core Strategy (Adopted 2007) – JCS

Vision: Maintaining the Broads & enhancing unique wildlife & leisure resource within special landscape. Policy framework for economically, socially & environmentally sensitive development will underpin a thriving community. Support diversification & sustainable infrastructures including maintenance & enhancement of Navigation + promoting enjoyment of the Broads. Only allowing development on the floodplain that has regard to social & economic well-being of area, landscape, natural resources, risks from flooding & respect natural functioning of flood plain. 12 Strategic Objectives for Core Strategy grouped in three themes: 1. Respecting environment & cultural assets; 2. The use and enjoyment of water & land; 3. Fostering communities.

Enhancing tourism offer for Greater Norwich & Broads area. Protecting & enhancing environmental resources & cultural heritage of the area. Increasing accessibility & use of public transport. Enhancing the business opportunities offered by area, particularly rural diversification. Building sustainable communities & increasing access to affordable housing, especially for key workers.

Impacts on water resource (supply & environment) Risks of flooding. Contribution to reducing risks and impacts of flooding. Reduction of social exclusion & contribution to quality of life for all. Contribution to housing provision (market & social) Impact on / enhancement of the environment. Contribution to healthy environment & provision of facilities.

Appendix Page 24






Learning Disability Employment Plan for Norfolk (2007) - JCS

People with learning difficulties should have same access to employment as others. People with learning difficulties should be supported to have a job and a career. There should be services to support people with learning difficulties to gain a job or job related activities as they want. People, their carers, families, friends & supporters of those with learning difficulties should have the right information about different ways of getting a job, benefits & who can help. Employers and services should be given support & good information so that they can work together to get more people into real jobs. Employment should be seen as a key issue for growing up amongst people with learning difficulties.

Address identified needs of people with learning difficulties and their support networks.

Reduction of social exclusion & contribution to quality of life for all. Contribution to economic provision.

Tomorrow’s Norfolk, Today’s Challenge – A Climate Change Strategy for Norfolk (2008)

Cut carbon emissions by reducing energy consumption & promoting shift to low-carbon technology. Improve resilience to range of risks posed by climate change.

Norfolk LAA target is 11% reduction in CO2 emissions across Norfolk by 2011. LAA target to reach Level 3 by 2011.

Consider means for reducing emissions & designing / locating development so that it can meet challenges / risks from climate change.

Consider how proposal meets challenges arising from climate change.

Partnership of Norfolk Authorities Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (2008)

Ensure flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding & directing development away from high risk areas. Provides advice on likely impacts of climate change & areas of SuDS applicability.

Consider the implications of flood risk for development, avoid allocations in areas at risk of flooding. Promote water efficiency & use of SuDS.

Need to avoid, reduce & manage flood risk now & with regard to climate change. Promote water efficiency & use of SuDS.

Norfolk Action – Norfolk’s Local Area Agreement (2008-11)

Local Area Agreement takes Sustainable Community Strategy of Norfolk County Strategic Partnership (Norfolk Ambition) & looks to deliver its long term vision.

National & local indicators as monitoring tools.

Maintain & enhance elements that contribute to quality of life of residents.

Consider whether proposal improves: Quality of where people live. Health of population. Accessibility to services & Facilities. Local community identity, good behaviour & co-operative attitudes. Response to challenges of climate change. Education & skills.

Breckland District Council Core Strategy and Development Control Policies (2009)

Sets out long-term development strategy & policies for Breckland District Council.

Consider cross border implications from proposals in Core Strategy and any potential cumulative effects.

Consider potential transport, environment, infrastructure and social impacts

Appendix Page 25






Waveney District Council Core Strategy (2009)

Sets out long-term development strategy & policies for Waveney District Council.

Consider cross border implications from proposals in Core Strategy and any potential cumulative effects.

Consider potential transport, environment, infrastructure and social impacts

Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk (publication document November 2009, adopted March 2011)

Sets out long-term development strategy & policies for South Norfolk, Broadland and Norwich City Councils up to 2026.

Identify sites for at least 47,500 new homes between 2001 & 2026. Target for growth in employment to provide 33,000 new jobs between 2008 & 2026.

Site Specific DPD will define growth locations identified in JCS including site allocations/ designations & policies. Site Specific DPD must be in conformity with Core Strategy.

SA objectives from JCS relevant & need to be translated, where appropriate to consideration of Site Specific issues.

Greater Norwich Development Partnership Green Infrastructure Strategy (2007) and Delivery Plan (2009)

Strategy for green infrastructure to complement housing & economic growth by providing high quality, accessible green infrastructure within a comprehensive landscape structure; promoting ecological networks & continuity & links between habitats; improving quality of life; helping to address climate change; improving access to habitats & green space & encouraging community well being.

Maximise opportunities for strategic & local green infrastructure. Protect & enhance existing sites, creating new sites & new linkages. Promote biodiversity, public access & health benefits arising from Green Infrastructure.

Contribution towards biodiversity, green infrastructure, public access, environmental improvements/protection & health benefits.

GNDP Greater Norwich Economic Strategy (2009-2014)

Defines priorities for economic development in greater Norwich area for a five year period.

Improve access to jobs. Provide facilities and services for all. Protect & enhance natural & built environment. Encourage economic development. Promote sustainable development.

Consider contribution to economic development, employment, skills, community life, infrastructure, sustainable development, environment & resource use.

Appendix Page 26






South Norfolk Alliance Sustainable Community Strategy - JCS

Vision: Healthier & even safer place to live, where crime levels & ‘fear of crime’ are low. Suitable accommodation, support & care are available for all. High learning expectations & achievement, meeting needs of individuals & economy. Environment is protected & respected, quality housing available to all & possible to travel around using varied forms of transport. Area where economic opportunity & development is diverse, sustainable, accessible & appropriate to needs of the community. Homes and Housing: Increase no. of affordable properties, inc. shared ownership Achieve high standard of design & efficient use of resources in developments. Development of the economy: Improve availability of jobs & ability of people to get them. Develop village & rural economy. Transport and getting about: Increase & improve use of public transport service. Improve rural accessibility. The environment: Reduce CO2 emissions & support renewables. Protect countryside, landscape & species & habitats. Minimise waste & increase recycling. Community life: Locate most new development where people have easy access to their essential needs & reduce need to travel. Promote social inclusion. Crime and community safety: Reduce crime, disorder, anti social behaviour & fear of crime. Health: Help people take responsibility for their lifestyles & health. Encourage walking & cycling & improve safety, fitness & health. Improve life for people suffering from mental health problems. Develop initiatives to tackle health inequalities. Young people: Tackle issues inc. lack of transport & leisure facilities, rural isolation, boredom & difficulty in accessing training.

Provide for housing requirements – for all sectors of community, in suitable locations. Encourage economic development. Promote accessibility. Promote sustainable development, address causes & implications of climate change, protect natural environments & countryside, minimise waste & encourage recycling. Promote safe environments. Promote healthy environments & provision of health & social facilities.

Contribution to housing provision. Contribution to economic Development. Contribution to accessibility Contribution to sustainable Development, impact on climate change, natural environment & countryside Contribution to a safe environment Contribution to a healthy environment Contribution provision of health & social facilities

South Norfolk Cycling Strategy - JCS

Maximise use of cycling as convenient, attractive, safe, healthy & secure means of transport & to integrate with other modes. Ensure that policies to encourage cycling & to provide for cyclists‘ needs are integrated with Community Strategy & LDF Maximise provision of convenient, safe & attractive cycle routes & parking. Integrate provisions for cycles with other forms of transport. To raise public awareness. To reduce cycle theft.

Encourage cycling & provision for cyclists needs

Contribution to accessibility & sustainable transport

Appendix Page 27






South Norfolk Corporate Environment Strategy - JCS

7 key policy areas: Managing the Council’s environmental impact Reducing resource use & energy consumption Transport Air, land and water quality Bio- and Geo-diversity The built and urban environment Waste management

Consider means for reducing environmental impacts

Contribution to traffic reduction. Air quality. Maintaining & enhancing biodiversity, geodiversity, flora & fauna Maintaining & enhancing distinctiveness & quality of landscapes & townscapes. Contribution to use of renewable energy & energy efficiency Reducing vulnerability to climate change Impact on water resources Contribution to minimising production of waste

South Norfolk Council’s Strategy for Health and Well-Being - JCS

Improve health & well-being of everyone who lives or works in South Norfolk Reduce health inequalities of those who are most in need.

Promote regular exercise. Protect local air quality. Reduce health impact of land contamination. Reduce effects of noise. Protect public health. Reduce risk of road traffic accidents. Improve partnership working & community development. Integrate communities. Help people access transport. Reduce financial hardship. Improve standard of private housing stock. Increase availability of affordable housing. Help the most vulnerable.

Contribution to maintaining & improving health Reducing social exclusion. Accessibility to services.

Appendix Page 28






South Norfolk Local Agenda 21 Strategy - JCS

Promote Economic Success. Create vibrant local economy giving access to satisfying & rewarding work without damaging environment. Value unpaid work. Meet Social Needs. Protect human health & amenity through safe, clean, pleasant environments. Emphasise health service prevention action as well as care 65% Maximise access to skills & knowledge. Ensure access to good food, water, housing & fuel at reasonable cost. Encourage access to facilities, services, goods & other people in ways which make less use of car & minimise impacts on environment. Culture, leisure & recreation available to all. Meet local needs locally. Make settlements 'human' in scale & form. Value & protect diversity& distinctiveness, strengthen community & cultural identity. Protect & enhance environment. Use energy, water & other natural resources efficiently & with care. Minimise waste, re-use or recover through recycling, composting or energy recovery. Limit pollution to levels which do not damage natural systems. Value & protect the diversity of nature

Various issues to be reflected in LDD policy

Contribution to local economy. Maintain & improve population health. Improving education & skills of population. Encourage local community identity, good behaviour & co-operative attitudes. Opportunities for population to have rewarding & satisfying employment. Quality of where people live. Accessibility to essential services & facilities Reduce effect of traffic on environment. Maintaining & enhancing biodiversity, geodiversity. Maintaining & enhancing distinctiveness & quality of landscapes & townscapes. Provision for sustainable use & sources of water supply contribution to minimising production of waste

Norwich Area Transport Strategy – JCS

Provide highest level of access to & within strategy area. Ensure journeys minimise adverse impact on people & built & natural environment. Promote vibrant city & other centres by improving accessibility for people & goods. Cater for travel consequences arising from growth aspirations. Maximise transport choice for all travelers. To reduce social exclusion. To enhance access for non-car modes. Minimise congestion and delays. Implement transport solutions that protect open space, wildlife habitats & water resources. Maximise safety & security.

Protect & enhance residential amenity & minimise community

severance.

Consider wide range of transport issues

Contribution to enhancing accessibility. Contribute to a safe environment Contribution to mitigate pollution & improve air quality.

Appendix Page 29






Norfolk Ambition (Norfolk Community Strategy) – JCS

To improve the quality of life for all the people of Norfolk. Key themes being:

Individuals have the opportunity to achieve a good quality of life.

Healthy lifestyles & access to health & social care.

People feel safe.

Educational attainment and opportunities for

learning throughout life.

All can play an active part in community life.

Environment is respected and enhanced, including renewable energies.

Culture, creativity and spirituality.

Distinctive economy. Physical & virtual comms. infrastructure.

Maintain and enhance the elements that contribute to the quality of life of residents

Contribution to or impact on quality of life elements: health, safety, educational attainment, community life, environment, culture, economy, communications infrastructure.

Shaping the Future - an economic strategy for Norfolk and Waveney, and a social cohesion strategy for Norfolk - JCS

Increase wealth creation by building a dynamic and supportive environment for business and enable our people to participate in the economy and maximise their potential whilst ensuring that we protect and enhance our physical environment. 5 Social cohesion themes - access, sustainable jobs, employment and personnel practices, community development, young people's needs.

Raise annual average rate of growth from projected 2.1 % to 2.5%. Create by 2007 an additional 11,000 above the projected figure of 348,000 Reduce unemployment to 1% below UK national average.

Encourage employment development in appropriate locations.

Contribution to economic provision

Historic Landscape Characterisation and Sensitivity Study (2009)

Understand the importance of the historic landscape character and sensitivity of change in Long Stratton, Wymondham, Hethersett-East and North-east Norwich due to proposed growth.

Maintain and enhance the elements that contribute to the historic landscape character.

Contribution to conserving & enhancing historic and landscape environment.

Landscape Character Assessment (2012) (Review)

Review of local landscape designations in respect to propose growth areas to highlight any changes required to the landscape character areas. Changes were recommended to both the Tas Tributary Farmland and Great Moulton Plateau.

Maintain and enhance the elements that contribute to the landscape character.

Contribution to conserving & enhancing local landscape character.

Conservation Area Statement (2013)

The appraisal aims to provide an understanding of the built heritage, and provide property owners and potential developers within the conservation area with clear guidance on planning matters and the types of development likely to be encouraged.

Preserve and enhance elements that contribute to the historic environment

Contributing to preserving and enhancing the historic environment

Appendix Page 30






South Norfolk Place Making Guide (2012)

To promote and secure high quality design in new development within the district. Additionally, to aid decision making when determining planning applications. The document sets out a number of design principles based on recognized on best practice and explains key requirements that the Council will take in to consideration when assessing proposals for new development. The guide expands upon planning policies in the GNDP JCS (2011), in particular Policy 2 ‘Promoting Good Design’, and will be used as a material consideration in the determine on planning applications.

Maintain and enhance the elements that contribute to the quality of built environment.

Contribution to or impact on the local context or distractive character of South Norfolk to achieve attractive, high quality, well designed and sustainable development.

Appendix Page 31

Appendix 2 – Baseline Information for South Norfolk

Appendix 2 – Baseline Information for South Norfolk SA Objective

South Norfolk Value

Trends

Comparison Value

Target

Comments

ENV 1 % of SSSIs in ‘favourable’ or ‘unfavourable recovering’ condition Source: Natural England

2012/13 – 86%

2008/09 – 33% 2009/10 – 40% 2010/11 – 86% 2011/12 – 86% 2012/13 – 86%

England 2013 – 96.21% sssi.naturalengland.org.uk - sssi report

Increase

Could consider developing indicators around:

candidate RIGS sites once NGP work complete

BAP habitats (dependent upon NBP resources)

ENV 1 Net change in County Wildlife Sites in “Positive Conservation Management Source: South Norfolk AMR

2012/13 – 59%

2008/09 – 44% 2009/10 – 48% 2010/11 – 55% 2011/12 – 56% 2012/13 – 59%

2011- 12: GNDP Area – 60% Broadland – 64% Norwich – 79%

Increase

ENV 2 Number of planning permissions granted contrary to Environment Agency advice on flood risk Source: South Norfolk AMR.

2012/13 – not available

2008/9 – 2 2009/10 – 0 2010/11 – 0 2011/12 - 0 2012/13 – Not Available

Not applicable

Zero

ENV 3 Per capita CO2 emissions in the LA area (tonnes/CO2) Source: GOV.UK

2011 – 7.3

Baseline – Per Capita Emissions (t) 8.8 tonnes CO2 (2006) 2007 – 8.6 2008 – 8.5 2009 – 7.7 2010 – 7.9

2011: Broadland – 7.1 Norwich – 5.7

decrease

Renewable energy generating capacity installed (MW) Source: South Norfolk AMR Source - Dept. Energy & Climate Change

2012 – 5.805 MW

2006 – 0.040 2007 – 0.045 2008 – 1.885 2009 – 2.139 2010 – 3.84 2011 – 3.84

2011 - Broadland – 3.238 2012 - Broadland – 3.238

Increase

Information updated from Dept. Energy and Climate Change/ RICARD0 – AEA https://restats.decc.gov.uk/

Appendix Page 32

http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/Special/sssi/reportAction.cfm?Report=sdrt15&Category=N&Reference=0

http://www.sssi.naturalengland.org.uk/Special/sssi/reportAction.cfm?Report=sdrt15&Category=N&Reference=0

https://restats.decc.gov.uk/cms/historic-regional-statistics/SearchForm?Search=Installed+capacity+South+Norfolk&action_results.x=35&action_results.y=13&start=0



South Norfolk Value

Trends

Comparison Value

Target

Comments

ENV 4 % of residents who travel to work: a) by private motor vehicle b) by public transport c) by foot or cycle d) work at home or mainly from home Source: 2011 Census

Base fig 60,333 a)71.65%(43,233) b) 5.9% (3574) c) 8.5% (1841 cycle, 3284 foot) d) 13.4% (8065)

Base figure, 2011 census Norfolk2001 2011 a) 65.4% 67.3% b) 4.8% 5.7% c) 16.3% 14.7% d) 10.8% 11.8%

a) Increased b) Increased c) Decreased d) Increased

ENV 5 Number of designated Air Quality Management Areas Source: Defra (www.airquality.co.uk) No. of areas where NO2 above 40µg/m3 No. of areas where further air quality investigation being undertaken Source: South Norfolk Air Quality Update

Zero XXXX XXXX XXXX

Zero XXXX XXXX XXXX

Zero XXXX XXXX XXXX

Zero Zero Zero Zero

Awaiting further info from South Norfolk Environmental Health on data and best way to express indicator/s to monitor following discussions with Norfolk Environmental Protection Officers group

ENV 6 Number of heritage assets at risk e.g. a) Listed Buildings

2008/9 a) 42

2007/8 a) 0/-4

Net decrease for a) and b)

b) Scheduled Ancient Monuments added/removed from Buildings at Risk register

b) 3/0

b) 0/0 2006/7 a) 0/-7 b) 0/0

Not applicable

Number of Conservation Area Character Appraisal & Management Plans adopted (0/52)

Total = 52 2008 – 12 2012 - 17

N/a

Not applicable

52/52

Number of TPOs served Source: South Norfolk AMR

2011/12 - 8

2009/10 -- 6 2010/11 – 10

Not applicable

N/a

Status of national landscape character areas No. applications where ENV1 reason for refusal

Maintained Not available

1990-98: Not available

Not applicable Not available

Maintain/enhance To be determined

Appendix Page 33

http://www.airquality.co.uk/



South Norfolk Value

Trends

Comparison Value

Target

Comments

ENV 7 % of new dwellings built on previously developed land Source: South Norfolk AMR

2012/13 – 23%

2008/ 09 – 38% 2009/ 10 – 32% 2010/ 11 – 29% 2011/12 – 25% 2012/13 – 23%

2012/ 13 Broadland – 51% Norwich – 76%

Decrease

ENV 8 Daily domestic water use – per capita consumption Source - Anglia Water/ GNDP AMR

No data available

2005/6 – 144 2006/7 - 146

GNDP area 2008/9 – 148.1 2009/10 – 142.7 2010/11 – 144.5

Data not available at district level. Figures refer to Norwich and the Broads water resource Zone with provides the most appropriate proxy area

Number of planning permissions granted contrary to Environment Agency advice on water quality Source: GNDP AMR

2011/12 - 0 2007/8 – 3 2008/9 – 2 2009/10 -0 2010/11 – 2

GNDP 2007/8 – 4 2008/9 – 4 2009/10 - 1

Zero

S 1 Affordable housing completions/year % of all completions that are affordable Source: GNDP AMR

2012/13 – JCS 33%

2007/08 – 17% 2008/09 – 40 % 2009/10 - 27% 2010/11 – 16% 2011/12 – 27% 2012/13 – 24%

GNDP Area completions 2007/08 – 22% 2008/09 – 34 % 2009/10 – 26% 2010/11 – 33% 2012/13 – 34%

Decrease

No. of Category 1 hazards in housing stock Source: Greater Norwich Household & Physical Survey 2005-06 / LPA

No data

2005/6 - 4600 (9.3%)

2005/6 Norwich - 4200 (9.8%), Broadland - 4200 (8.1%)

Currently being assessed

S 2 Number of Super Output Areas in most deprived 10% of England. Source: Norfolk Insight

Zero

None

Not applicable

Maintain

% of economically active working age people (aged 16-64) - Unemployed Source: NOMIS (Jan to Dec)

2013 – 7.3

2006 – 2.7% 2007 – 2.8% 2008 – 5.0% 2009 – 4.3% 2010 – 8.6% 2011 – 8.6% 2012 – 3.2%

Norfolk 2009 - 5.19% 2011 – 2.5%

Decrease

Appendix Page 34



South Norfolk Value

Trends

Comparison Value

Target

Comments

S 3 % of working age (16-64) population economically active Source: NOMIS (Jan to Dec)

2013 – 84.5%

2007 – 85.5% 2008 – 80.1% 2009 – 80.38% 2010 – 79.4% 2011 – 82.3% 2012 – 89.3%

Norfolk GB 2009 - 80.91% NDA 2012/13 – 78.6% 77.1%

Increase

Gross weekly pay (F/T workers) Source: NOMIS

2012 - £554 2006– £431.1 2007– £438.5 2008– £464.5 2009– £493.2 2010 - £510 2011 - £517

East of England GB 2006 – £466.0 2007 – £479.9 2008 – £499.0 2009 – £509.4 2012 - £531.0 £508

Increase

S 4 % of residents who travel to work: a) by private motor vehicle b) by public transport c) by foot or cycle d) work at home or mainly from home Source: 2011 Census

Base fig 60,333 a) 71.65%(43,233) b) 5.9% (3574) c) 8.5% (1841 cycle, 3284 foot) d) 13.4% (8065)

2001 census a) 70.82% b) 5.15% c) 9.82% d) 12.02%


a)Increase b)Increase c) Decrease d) Increase

Accessibility of local GP services (15 & 30mins walk/public transport) Source: Norfolk Insight

2009 15mins – 65.63% 30mins – 94.32%

Norfolk(2009) 15mins – 72.42% 30mins – 96.41%

Appendix Page 35



South Norfolk Value

Trends

Comparison Value

Target

Comments

S 5 % of working age population with qualifications at NVQ 4 or above Source: NOMIS

2013 – 32.2%

2005 – 27.4% 2006 – 33.2% 2007 – 29.0% 2008 – 26.5% 2012 – 34.1%

East of England 2005 – 25.0% 2006 – 25.0% 2007 – 26.0% 2008 – 26.1% 2012 – 32.9% 2013 – 33.2%

Increase

All Schools England 2012 – 59.4% State funded only – 58.8% LA – 55.6%

% of 16 year old with 5 or more GCSEs grade A-C Source: (secondary schools) Dept Education

2012 - 63%

2009 – 59% 2010 – 58% 2011 – 68%

Norfolk 2004/5 – 52.6 2009 – 50.0% 2010 – 52.3% 2011 – 55.4% 2012 – 55.6%

Decrease

S 6 Life expectancy, at birth, of

a) males b) females

Source: ONS/AMR

2009-11 a) 81.1 b) 83.4

2005- 7 a) 79.5 b) 83.3 2008 - 2010 a) 80.7 b) 83.2

East of England A B 2005/07 – 78.6 82.5 2007/09 – 79.2 83 2009/11 – 79.9 83.6

Increase

S 7 Incidences of crime committed

a) Domestic burglaries b) Violence c) Offences against vehicles

Source: ONS

12 months to Sept 13 a) 171 b) 798 c) 310

Same 12 month period last year a) 168 b) 645 c) 375

12 Months to March 13 Norfolk / 1000 Population (HMIC) A – 1.6 B – 9.42 C – 3.33

A- Increase B- Increase C- Decrease

S 8 General resident satisfaction levels Source: MORI people survey

2008/9 91%

2006/7 90%

National 86%

Increase

EC 1 New business registration rate Source: NOMIS

2011 – 440

2008 - 415 2009 – 450 2010 – 350

2011: Broadland – 385 Norwich - 495

Increase

The VAT registrations data source be replaced with a table based on

the UK Business Counts source

Appendix Page 36



South Norfolk Value

Trends

Comparison Value

Target

Comments

EC 2 Allocated employment land (Ha) without planning permission (COI BD3) Source: South Norfolk AMR NCC Employment Land Monitoring Report. 2011/12 Table 2

2013 94.7

2006 – 81.84 2007 – 72.48 2008 – 69.87 2009 – 69.80 2012 – 95.3

Not applicable

Decrease

South Norfolk South Norfolk currently has 104.7 hectares of available employment land (17% of the county total): 8.8% has associated planning permission; 1.2% is currently under construction leaving 94.7% without any form of permission. If average take up (4.1 hectares per annum) were to continue in the district, all employment land will be taken up in 25 years. Ref. NCC Employment Land

Monitoring Report. 2012/13. http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/view/NCC122493

EC 3 % of residents who travel to work: a) by private motor vehicle b) by public transport c) by foot or cycle d) work at home or mainly from home Source: 2011 Census

Base fig 60,333 a) 71.65%(43,233) b) 5.9% (3574) c) 8.5% (1841 cycle, 3284 foot) d) 13.4% (8065)

2001 census a) 70.82% b) 5.15% c) 9.82% d) 12.02%


a)Increased b)Increased c) Decreased d) Increased

Average distance travelled to work by residents Source: National Statistics

16km

Not available

East of England 15.8km

Decrease

Only 2001 figures available RD

Appendix Page 37

http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/view/NCC122493

http://www.norfolk.gov.uk/view/NCC122493



South Norfolk Value

Trends

Comparison Value

Target

Comments

EC 4 Proportion of population aged 19-64 for males and 19-59 for females qualified to at least Level 2 or higher Source: Audit Commission (N.I. 163)

2009 – 82.1%

2006 – 75.2% 2007 – 68.4% 2008 – 69.4%

2009: Broadland – 74.7% Norwich – 71.2%

http://data.gov.uk/dataset/ni-163-proportion-of-population-qualified-to-at-least-level-2

Per capita CO2 emissions in the LA area (tonnes/CO2) Source: GOV.UK

2011 – 7.3

Baseline – Per Capita Emissions (t) 8.8 tonnes CO2 (2006) 2007 – 8.6 2008 – 8.5 2009 – 7.7 2010 – 7.9

2011: Broadland – 7.1 Norwich – 5.7

Decrease

EC 5 Planning permissions granted for new businesses in rural areas (policy EMP 4) Source: South Norfolk AMR

2009 - 26

2005 – 25 2006 – 27 2007 – 18 2008 – 33 2009 – 26

Not applicable

Increase

Appendix Page 38




Appendix 3: Consultation comments received on the Sustainability Appraisal and the Council’s responses

Scoping Report comments (2010)

Organisation Summary of representation Response

NB: Page numbers referred to are those in the Sustainability Appraisal Scoping Report as presented to Cabinet on 12th July 2010

Norfolk Wildlife Trust Satisfied that the issues relevant to their area of interest are covered in the report.

Noted.

Norfolk County Council Amend reference to Greater Norwich Housing Market Assessment on page 8 to include November 2009 update.

Agree. Make amendment as suggested.

Norfolk County Council Clarification provided re: Norfolk Historic Environment Record (NHER) sites on page 13. A high number of records does not indicate that there is necessarily greater historical interest in that area, only that it has hitherto been investigated more thoroughly. Additionally, all listed buildings and scheduled monuments are included on the NHER, so the report may have double counted these assets. Otherwise, inclusion of the significance of the wider historic landscape is very welcome.

Agree. Amend NHER reference in table on page 13 to “sites of local

archaeological interest” and change figure to 2875.

Norfolk County Council Suggest page 14 also refers to County-run facilities, in particular that the County Council provides four Household Waste Recycling Centres within South Norfolk. It is suggested that the reduction of waste should be included within ‘climate change’ on page 38.

Agree. Refer to four County-run Household Waste Recycling Centres on

page 14. Include reduction of waste under ‘climate change’ on page 38.

Appendix Page 39


Norfolk County Council Suggest that ENV6 (Appendix Two) include an attribute related to landscape. An appropriate attribute may be to monitor the status of the national landscape character areas - these are already monitored through the Countryside Quality Counts programme.

Agree. Include suggested indicator & also no. of planning apps where

South Norfolk Local Plan (SNLP) policy ENV1 ‘Protection of landscape’ is

reason for refusal.

Norfolk County Council Suggest reference re: need for developer funding for the sustainable provision of facilities and infrastructure at district and county level. This could be inserted within Task 3 Sustainability Issues (Access to Services; Leisure, Culture and Recreation; Education; Transport and Accessibility; and Transport Infrastructure) or within Task 4.

Agree. Include reference within suggested sections of Task 3.

CPRE (Norfolk) No comment on whether all relevant plans, policies and programmes included. Baseline information seems to cover appropriate areas but much of it is based on Regional Spatial Strategy figures etc. Most of sustainability issues identified but there are conflicting aspirations and potential for contradiction e.g. high level of growth & desire to protect and enhance character of area. SA objectives cover range of aims but same conflict as above e.g. ENV5 seeks to “minimise noise, vibration and light pollution” very much doubt this will be case once the 32,000 homes identified in Joint Core Strategy achieved.

Note the points raised and acknowledge potential conflicts

re: growth vs. environmental protection. However, it is the role

of the SA to highlight such issues so that they can be taken

into account during policy development and decision-making.

The potential to review the housing figures/targets falls outside of

the remit of this scoping report

East of England Development Agency (EEDA)

Suggest need more evidence to cover broader sustainable economic development in East of

The relative social, economic and environmental implications of

Appendix Page 40


England and on socio-economic factors to cover:

the need for the development scheme

the wider socio-economic benefits and costs (including an analysis of additionality – the added value generated by the scheme, taking account value that would have happened without the scheme)

an analysis of alternative options.

Inclusion of appropriate headline regional ambitions from ‘The Regional Economic Strategy (Inventing our Future – Collective action for a sustainable economy, 2008)’ from the suggestions (below)

Productivity and prosperity Annual growth in real workplace-based GVA over 2008 – 2031 Per capita at 2.3 per cent Per worker at 2.1 per cent Conventional economic impacts (GDP £) Wider economic impacts (all GDP £) - Agglomeration - Imperfect competition - Labour market impacts Employment - Employment rate by 2031 - Working-age population at 80 per cent - 16–74 population at 70 per cent Skills - Share of working-age population with qualifications by 2020 (aged 19 to state pension age)

development/policies will be assessed via the SA. The ‘need’ for a scheme can be included as part any assessment. No change. The opportunity to assess the wider socio-economic benefits and costs can be included within the existing SA framework – No change. One of the main purposes of the SA is to assess and compare the options available. No change.

Productivity and prosperity, Conventional economic impacts and Wider

economic impacts – No change. The SA is not intended to act as a detailed

economic activity monitor rather it is an assessment tool to ensure that the

positive and negative implications of policy/proposal options are understood

and included as part of the decision making process. The elements referred

to in the representation can be included in the consideration of any

policy/proposal but the inclusion of individual indicators for each is not supported.

Employment – No change.

S2 (page 82) and S3 cover percentage unemployment and percentage

of population of working age that are economically active. These are

considered sufficient.

Skills – No change.

S5 (page 83) already includes percentage of working age population with

NVQ level 4 or above and percentage of 16 year olds with 5+ GCSEs

(grades A-C). Further detailed are not considered necessary at this point

but can be added in if monitoring reveals the need.

Appendix Page 41


- NVQ level 2 or equivalent qualification and above 90 per cent - NVQ level 3 or equivalent qualification and above 68 per cent - NVQ level 4 or equivalent qualification and above 40 per cent

Comments received to the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document Interim Sustainability Appraisal Consultation 2012

Summary of Main Issues Council's Assessment

19788 -

Hethersett Land

Ltd

Hethersett Land Ltd have no specific comments to the general approach to the Sustainability Appraisal Report although the site assessment tables are difficult to interpret and make reference to sites which are not identified on the maps. For instance the Hethersett North site has been split up into different components, which are not shown on the Preferred Options (Sept 2012) map. Also, some results in the assessment tables seem not to appear correct in light of some available evidence and can be updated.

The information given will be assessed and the site assessment tables will be updated appropriately

Appendix Page 42


Specifically, for sites north of Hethersett, the site assessment tables are out of date and can be updated to reflect current available evidence. See answer to question 12 for more comments. (See full, scanned rep)

20465 - Steve

Horrocks [9331]

The sustainability appraisal interim report (SAI) appears comprehensive and most sections are reasonably clear. I believe that combining the 'traffic light' approach with an easy-to-understand numerical approach would show clearly whether sites were being chosen for reasons primarily relating to objectively-ranked factors or that planning judgement reasons were considered of greater importance. Combining the traffic light notation and a numeric approach seems a clearer way of publishing and justifying the site assessment process. I would welcome South Norfolk implementing this approach to give reassurance to local stake-holders about the consistency and robustness of the process thus far. See full scanned rep attached (section 2

There is inevitably some subjectivity and professional judgement in reaching conclusions on each site. The reasons for choosing (or not choosing) each site have been clearly explained in the 'Comments' row in the site assessment tables. Adding extra numeric factors could add spurious legitimacy to elements (such as landscape) where planning judgement must be exercised, and could lead to sub-optimal decisions being made

20181 -

Bidwells (Mr

Graham

Bloomfield)

[1435]

Woodton No particular comments with regard to the appraisal and the site assessments. Specific comments relating to the Site Assessment process for Woodton and Bedingham (Map 090) and our client's site (0157) are detailed at Question 12.

Comment noted - will be responded to via Q12

Appendix Page 43


18295 -

Costessey

Parish Council

(Mrs Hilary

Elias) [8570

Councillors are concerned that whilst the SA includes environmental, social and economic objectives it often appears to be the case that development takes place without supporting infrastructure. Traffic and transport are major issues in Costessey. All development in Costessey impact on the roads and the Longwater junction with the A47. Councillors questioned the level of detail re traffic/transport for each site

The infrastructure needs of all proposed sites are considered appropriately, with the impact on Longwater junction a key element for Costessey sites. However, the full detail of traffic and transport impacts are most appropriately addressed through individual planning applications

19811 - Mr

Greengrass

[8593

Bawburgh is a settlement within the NPA which can accommodate further limited additional development to help deliver the smaller sites in the NPA allowance.

Whilst Bawburgh is in the NPA, it is an "other village", with no minimum allocation, due to its lack of services. It is concluded that only one site of 5 dwellings is appropriate to allocate

18988 -

Chedgrave

Parish Council

(Clive Boyd)

[9453]

I would have preferred greater involvement of our Parish Council when SNC was first investigating potential sites

The Site Allocations document has now been subject to three rounds of public consultation, with all parish councils having been written to at each round, so it is considered that parish councils have had ample opportunity to engage in the process

19256 - mr

William Ling

[8742]

Good but flawed in that the public will not understand the procedure and the building industry does. Also have failed too see are elected representatives.

Many members of the public have understood the process and written cogent responses. South Norfolk councillors have played a key role in preparing the document and

Appendix Page 44


communicating information with their residents

19839 -

Bidwells (Mr

Graham

Bloomfield)

[1435]

No particular comments with regard to the appraisal and the site assessments. However, it is particularly important to consider that the site assessment process for Costessey (map 27a) and site 0036 in particular, has been superseded by appeal decision APP/L2630/A/2170575. This granted outline planning permission for 62 dwellings on site 0036. We would suggest that the revised status for site 0036 with the site now benefitting from outline permission should be reflected within the Site Specific Allocations & Policies DPD and proposal map 027a by including the site within the preferred development boundary.

Site 0036 was granted permission on appeal largely due to the lack of a five-year housing land supply, despite the Inspector acknowledging considerable landscape harm. It is therefore not considered appropriate to include this site in the development boundary when to do so would mean that any later "infill" type proposals/densification would be much easier to achieve

18148 - Mr &

Mrs AP & SA

Goldring [9205

We would have to rely on your expertise. Comment noted

19900 - Mr

Vaughan Smith

[4283]

The Sustainability Appraisal has been carried out in accordance with the relevant guidance and legislation for preparing Development Plan documents. It is crucial that the appropriate Sustainability Appraisal has been undertaken in accordance with relevant legislation otherwise the document could be found unsound by the Inspector at any subsequent

Comments noted

Appendix Page 45


Public Examination. The interim report that has been published for consultation is considered to be robust at this stage and has appropriately assessed the sites that are allocated in the Preferred Options for development sites allocations and development boundaries document.

19002 - Dr John

Mann [9454]

It is clearly sensible to consider sustainability at an early stage. However, where 'a good range of facilities' is mentioned, the quality of each should be carefully assessed.

To consider the quality of services would add an element of subjectivity to the process which would be unhelpful (i.e. controversial). Restricting consideration to just the quantity of services retains an objective position

19010 - Mr

Hadingham

[9455]

More publicity As the Site Allocations process has been subject to three rounds of public consultation, with all parish councils contacted at each stage, alongside press notices and articles, with copies of documentation lodged in all South Norfolk libraries, it is considered that publicity has been adequate (and in line with that required by the Council's Statement of Community Involvement)

18437 - Mr

David Goldson

A complicated procedure - difficult to comprehend by the general public but

Comment noted

Appendix Page 46


[8643] satisfactory overall

18940 - Mr

John Downing

[7932]

Whilst a lot of detail is given there are inconsitencies with this document and the scoring on the site assessment table for the Norwich Fringe where site 1173 has not been assessed for intrusion on the NSBLPZ.

The site assessment for 1173 (Trowse) does consider the Norwich Southern Bypass Landscape Protection Zone, as can be seen in the 'traffic light' table

18282 -

Rockland St

Mary with

Hellington PC

(Mr M Presland)

[9254]

Yes Comment noted

19938 -

Bidwells (Mr

Graham

Bloomfield)

[1435]

No particular comments with regard to the appraisal and the site assessments. Specific comments relating to the Site Assessment process for Ditchingham (Map 090) and our client's site (061) are detailed at Question 12.

Comment noted

19961 -

Diocese of

Norwich (The

Diocese of

Norwich) [7360]

It is considered that the overall approach has been appropriate. However, in relation to the residential allocations at Framingham Earl, it is suggested that the preferred options have not sufficiently allowed for smaller scale allocations that can come forward for development rapidly. The preferred allocations consequently rely on a lower quantity of landowners/developers, rather than spreading risk and opportunity.

The Site Allocations Plan runs to 2026. All allocated sites have had their viability confirmed, and the three allocated sites in Poringland/Framingham Earl are the most appropriate to allocate

Appendix Page 47


It is argued that the benefit of providing smaller scale allocations should not be disregarded as they enable development to be more evenly spread and can assist in providing a variety of development opportunities and outcomes. An edge of village proposal, slightly more distant from the village centre is evidently desirable to potential occupiers, yet still sufficiently proximate to services to be deemed sustainable and worthy of allocation.

19848 - BDP

(Mr Andrew

Watson) [9613]

NRP is broadly in agreement with the general approach taken in preparing the DPD, including the sustainability appraisal report, overall objectives and site assessment process.

Comment noted

18182 -

Bramerton PC

(Mr Brian

Ansell) [8264]

Appears so. Comment noted

18747 -

Redenhall with

Harleston Town

Council (Mrs

Margot

Harbour) [8597

We consider that the approach taken has been largely appropriate. However, we do consider that further attention is required to meet the future demands on traffic flows and car parking.

The impact of development proposals on traffic flows is a key consideration in their acceptability (or otherwise). Appropriate levels of car-parking are best assessed at the planning application stage

19095 - Cllr

Leslie Dale

It is incomplete. The first line of the first paragraph requires the "identifying of

The impact on existing communities is considered, for

Appendix Page 48


[8581] environmental impacts". In the context of the growth areas being asked to swallow the developments, the individual site assessments and preamble make no mention of the obvious impacts upon the existing community. Reassess in retrospect.

example, with reference to traffic impacts and impacts on the character and form of settlements. However, the overall level of growth for each settlement has already been set in the adopted Joint Core Strategy

19733 -

Chedgrave

Parish Council

(Miss J M

Bircham BSc

MRICS) [9597]

It is not currently a statutory requirement and is premature to carry out at this stage. It should only be done as and when it is required.

Sustainability appraisal is a statutory requirement and has been prepared hand-in-hand with options development for the document

19484 - Mrs S

De-Courtney

[9517]

Not everyone has access to a computer to look up information. More consultation with local residents.

Information has been posted to those requesting it. In addition, all parish councils received hard copies of documentation, as has South Norfolk libraries. SNC officers have also undertaken a number of public 'roadshows' during the document production process. With three separate consultation rounds, and thousands of responses received, it is not accepted that more consultation is needed

20048 -

Bidwells (Mr

Generally support the appraisal and site assessment approach. However specific comments relating to the assessment of Site

Comment noted

Appendix Page 49


Graham

Bloomfield)

[1435]

1005 are detailed at question 12.

18625 -

Hethersett

Parish Council

(Ian Weetman)

[5115]

The PC considers that the approach taken has been appropriate

Comment noted

18721 - Mr

Roger Smith

[9398]

Density of housing development is a major issue, which is to be "subject to form, character and servicing restraints". The implication of this is not evident from the approach being taken in determining the number of units proposed.

Form, character and servicing restraints will influence acceptable densities, but it is unlikely that an extremely low density scheme (below 20 dwellings per hectare) would be appropriate. No change is needed

19566 - Mrs

Alison Morsom

[9526]

The approach is too localised. The bigger picture should be looked at

The adopted Joint Core Strategy sets the bigger picture for future development in South Norfolk. In a rural district, with many small settlements, a localised approach is also necessary, however

19795 - Parker

Planning

Services Ltd

(Mr Jason

Parker) [9610]

Mainly yes - however certain criteria such as brownfield and infill not given weight.

Both brownfield and infill statuses are given weight in the site assessment process - both form part of the 'traffic light' table

19555 - Dr M No I consider that too much has been done by The site assessment exercise

Appendix Page 50


Fewster [8404] looking at maps and statistics and too little by visiting and talking to the inhabitants of settlements over a period.

relies on a mix of published information, officers' local knowledge and the consultation responses from local residents. Inevitably there will sometimes be disagreement between what the Council believes are acceptable sites and local residents' views, but the reasons for all decisions have been made clear

20435 - Savills

(Mr Mark

Hodgson)

[9618]

The Sustainability Appraisal (SA) has to be carried out in accordance with the relevant guidance and legislation for preparing Development Plan documents. This is required by the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. The Council has to ensure that its proposed Development Plan Documents have been appropriately assessed in terms of its environmental impact as a result of the requirements set out in the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive. The interim report that has been published for consultation acknowledges that SA is an iterative process and will be updated as the Site Specific Allocations DPD is progressed. It is important that this process is robust and can withstand challenge and investigation from

Comment noted

Appendix Page 51


third parties. At the present time we can see no reason why this should not be the case.

18458 - Mr

Roger Margand

[9312]

The report has been written in a very technical way and is difficult to understand without specific focused knowledge. The abbreviations in it are often not explained or defined at the time they are used. Consequently it is difficult for a member of the public to come to any definitive views. As a draftsman by trade, I found the report whilst seeming to hit the points required by regulation, turgid, unfriendly and difficult to read. If you are serious about consultation, please try and consult in a way that encourages not discourages feedback and comment

Sustainability Appraisal is formal legal process to be followed, so an element of technical language is unavoidable. However, the next iteration of the SA will have a non-technical summary and a glossary included

19969 - Hibbert

& Key [7363]

Hibbett and Key have no specific comments on the 'general' approach to the Sustainable Appraisal Report. However, some results in the assessment tables seem do not appear correct in light of available evidence and can be updated. Specifically, for sites in Framingham Earl, the site assessment tables are out of date and can be updated to reflect current available evidence. See answer to Q.12 for more detailed comments.

The information provided will be assessed and any appropriate modifications will be made

19509 - Mr

Stephen Joyce

[9519]

I think it is a good idea to get the residents view and take into account all the negative and positive effect the new buildings will bring to

Comment noted. All positive and negative impacts are taken into account when considering potential

Appendix Page 52


Brooke. sites

19019 - Ms

Susan Stacey

[9457]

The approach seems appropriate. However this was a lengthy document which was quite difficult to follow.

SA is a legal and technical process, and with many hundreds of potential sites to assess, a lengthy document is unavoidable

18415 -

Bernard & Mary

Pitt [2672]

Yes Comment noted

19168 - A N

Williams [3092]

It is impracticable to reach a considered opinion on each policy of the SAR by every member of the Parish Council in a meeting due to weight of information. The policies are created by SNDC and applied as they see appropriate where each community has not created its own Neighbourhood Plan. Therefore the Parish Council is not in a position to offer an alternative at this point. Scole Parish does however have a Community Survey completed in 2009 and updated annually which has not been considered.

Scole Parish Council could prepare a Neighbourhood Plan if they wish. The Site Allocations document can only consider those sites proposed by landowners or developers

18787 - Scole Parish Council (Mrs Corinne

Moore) [9415]

It is impracticable to reach a considered opinion on each policy of the SAR by every member of the Parish Council in a meeting due to weight of information. The policies are created by SNDC and applied as they see appropriate where each community has not created its own Neighbourhood Plan. Therefore the Parish Council is not in a position to offer an alternative at this point.

Scole Parish Council could prepare a Neighbourhood Plan if they wish. The Site Allocations document can only consider those sites proposed by landowners or developers

Appendix Page 53


Scole Parish does however have a Community Survey completed in 2009 and updated annually which has not been considered.

20218 - Parker

Planning

Services Ltd

(Mr Jason

Parker) [9610]

Site 0161 - Wortwell Brownfield/previously developed land has not been given priority in this case or infill sites.

Brownfield land is one of the assessment criteria, and it is therefore considered positively. However, the brownfield/greenfield status is only on criterion amongst many, and its presence does not necessarily mean that a brownfield site should be allocated if, say, the highways impact would be unacceptable

18314 -

Tasburgh PC

(Catherine.

Moore) [8548]

No comment or response Comment noted

20036 -

Persimmon

Homes Ltd

Anglia Region

[280]

No specific comments to make on Sustainability Appraisal.

Comment noted

19590 - Mrs

Karin Rundle

[9528]

Alpington/Yelverton: No, the infrastructure, roads, sewers and overall viability has not been considered

Infrastructure needs are considered for all potential sites, and all allocated sites in Alpington/Yelverton are supported by viability letters from the landowner/developer

Appendix Page 54


18938 - Mr

Steven Fisher

[9451]

Don't agree. All options within existing boundary should have been fully explored and solutions sought, before opting for 'easy fix' of simply extending development area.

Weight has been given to all potential sites within the development boundary. However, in a largely rural district such as South Norfolk there are few brownfield sites and so it is inevitable that some greenfield extensions outside the development boundary will be necessary to help meet housing needs

20170 - Mr &

Mrs R L

Wharton [8270]

The conclusions column does not fairly reflect a number of possible site options. In our opinion there are sites shown as red and amber which are suitable.

There is inevitably some subjectivity in assessing the acceptability of potential sites, and in some settlements there may be more "acceptable" sites than need to be allocated to meet allocation figures. The Council is satisfied that the allocated sites are those which are most appropriate

20187 - Mrs

Michelle

Richman [9540]



Appendix Page 55


19122 - Mr &

Mrs Jeremy

Brown [9465]

19757 - Savills

(Mr Will Lusty)

[8119] 19914 -

Bidwells (Mr

Graham

Bloomfield)

[1435] 20163 -

Mr Steven

Fisher [9451]


There is inevitably some disagreement with the conclusions reached for certain sites However, SNC feels that the sites allocated are the most appropriate

19264 - Lady

Veronica

Fitzroy [9479]

There are inconsistencies with the document and I did not find it terribly clear & had to really study it.

Any inconsistencies will be remedied

20086 - Mr &

Mrs Ian & Julie

Ward [7905]



20097 - Mr &

Mrs Sheehan

The conclusions column does not fairly reflect a number of possible site options. In our

There is inevitably some subjectivity in assessing the

Appendix Page 56


[9535] opinion there are sites shown as red and amber which are suitable.

acceptability of potential sites, and in some settlements there may be more "acceptable" sites than need to be allocated to meet allocation figures. The Council is satisfied that the allocated sites are those which are most appropriate

20140 - Mr

Nigel Watson

[9537]



20116 - Mrs

Mollie Arnold

[9536]

The conclusions column does not fairly reflect a number of possible site options. In our opinion there are sites shown as red and amber which are suitable


19591 - Mr Phil

Gledhill [7798]

The conclusions column does not fairly reflect a number of possible site options. In our opinion there are sites shown as red and amber which are suitable

Inevitably there is an element of subjectivity in assessing sites' acceptability. There are also cases where a number of sites may be

Appendix Page 57


individually acceptable, but not all are needed to meet the allocated figure in the Joint Core Strategy. However, the Council needs to decide which sites are allocated, and the reasoning for each site is explained

20063 - Mrs Liz

Alden [9530]



18921 - Mr

George

Bircham [6888]

More consideration should be given to the needs and housing of local people.

The overall housing allocation for each settlement has largely been set in the adopted Joint Core Strategy. Local need for affordable housing is assessed regularly, however

20198 - Mr

David Richman

[9193]


There is inevitably some subjectivity in assessing the acceptability of potential sites, and in some settlements there may be more "acceptable" sites than need to be allocated to meet allocation figures. The Council is satisfied

Appendix Page 58


that the allocated sites are those which are most appropriate

19925 - Robert

Doughty

Consultancy

Limited (Mr

Robert

Doughty) [9373]

Objection to the Sustainability Appraisal with regard to the assessment approach adopted as no attempt has been made to review individual sites with landowners

All sites suggested for development were assessed against a detailed checklist. This gave the Council a high level of detail about the suitability of each site for allocation, this coupled with the fact that information submitted about each site is kept on file, meant that it was not considered necessary to review each individual site with the landowner. The Council were aware that the owner wished to promote site A0018 for mixed use or housing as this is referred to in the conclusions column of the site assessment table. It was considered that there were more preferable sites for housing located elsewhere in Loddon with better accessibility to services and facilities

19133 - Robert

Knights [5750]

The process requires amending by looking at the environmental impact on flooding in this 'preferred site'. This land is not the 'right place' for growth within the village as the road in from Wymondham is already inadequate for a

The site lies in Flood Zone 1, and is therefore not at significant risk of flooding. The site is concluded to be appropriate for allocation; 15 dwellings in Spooner Row would

Appendix Page 59


gateway into the village due to heavy traffic flow.

not add significantly to traffic flows, and is within the range allocated in the Joint Core Strategy

20075 - Mrs

Cruickshank

[9533]



20151 - Mr &

Mrs Trevor &

Linda Forder

[9539]



19134 - Stoke

Holy Cross PC

(Mrs L Marsh)

[9464]

The site assessment comment for sites in Stoke Holy Cross are disappointingly inadequate, and in the parish Council's opinion have resulted in an incorrect analysis of the capacity of the village to accept additional development and a flawed specific site assessment, that has been used to identify preferred sites.

Stoke Holy Cross is identified for 10-20 dwellings, but has been concluded to be acceptable to accommodate some of the 'floating' 1800 dwellings in the NPA. The chosen sites for 75 dwellings are concluded to be appropriate for allocation

Appendix Page 60


75 dwellings are being proposed for lower Stoke, which will undoubtedly put significant pressure on existing services and facilities in the village such as the school, drainage, and roads, and there is inaccurate assessment of their current availability and adequacy. The Parish Council is therefore very concerned that it has been assumed that this scale of growth will be acceptable when it clearly will create future planning problems that have not yet been taken into account.

19515 - Mr and

Mrs Betts

[9520]

Whilst agreeing the need for strong, healthy communities we feel that the chosen site in Bracon Ash is too large a development for the needs and infrastructure of the village it will not enhance the environment and is not in the heart of the village. The access from the B1113 is highly dangerous and there is no footpath, which even if created would still be a major problem for pedestrians as this road is one with a high traffic volume.

Whilst some highways improvements may be necessary to the B1113/A140 junction, site 0819 is concluded to be the most appropriate to allocate in Bracon Ash

20212 -

Durrants

(Richard

Prentice) [1407]

Woodton Yes Comment noted

20422 - J M

Greetham

The Council's consultation includes the preferred options for the development and use of land having regard to the Joint Core

Comment noted

Appendix Page 61


[4475] Strategy and a Sustainability Appraisal Report (SA). The SA Report and the work undertaken as part of that process has been prepared in accordance with the Government Guidance and we are satisfied that it is reasonably robust in the approach to the site assessment process.

18477 - Dr G.

Martin Courtier

[7815] 19011 -

Wheatacre &

Burgh St Peter

Parish Council

(Mr Simon

Solomon)

[6584]

Yes Comment noted

18155 - Mr M C

Litton [9207]

Yes appropriate. Comment noted

20251 - Easton

Landowners

Consortium

[7254]

Refer to full submission The Sustainability Appraisal Report and the work undertaken as part of that process has been prepared in accordance with the Government Guidance. The Council fully appreciate that the process is an iterative one and acknowledges that the performance of the Plan has to be tested against identified social, environmental and economic objectives. It is

Comment noted

Appendix Page 62


our view that the sustainability appraisal follows Government Guidance and is robust and consequently it has appropriately assessed sites within the site assessment process.

18330 - Thurton

PC (R Taylor)

[1180]

Yes Comment noted

19154 - Cllr

Margaret

Dewsbury

[9466

Yes Comment noted

19070 - MRS

SHIRLEY

DENNISON

[5034]

The approach seems reasonable. Comment noted

19235 - Natural

England (Ms J

Nuttall) [9476]

The approach taken to assessing the sites against a range of criteria that address the SA objectives identified for the DPD is welcomed; in particular Natural England is pleased to note the inclusion of a range of relevant environmental criteria that has been used to assess the sites including effects on biodiversity, landscape and soils. We note that the SA identifies that none of the preferred allocations will have a direct adverse effect on designated sites and that any other

A Habitats Regulations Assessment is being prepared in consultation with Natural England, and Natural England's assistance in the process is much appreciated

Appendix Page 63


potential effects will be confirmed as part of the 'Appropriate Assessment' required under the Conservation (Habitats and Species) Regulations 2010. Natural England advises that the results of this assessment (HRA) and any mitigation recommendations should inform preparation of this Plan and the Development Management DPD. Natural England will be pleased to provide comments on revised versions of this Plan and the Development Management Policies DPD, following completion of the HRA.

19873 -

Durrants

(Richard

Prentice) [1407]

Yes Comment noted

19467 - Dudley

Jones [6175]

I feel that the approach taken has been entirely appropriate & reasonable.

Comment noted

19881 - Burt

Boulton

Holdings

Limited [7336]

The approach taken to the Sustainability Report is supported in general terms.

Comment noted

18395 -

Marlingford &

Colton PC (Mr

M Bergin)

[7437]

Yes, although resolving potential conflicts between SA objectives and site specific policy objectives may not always be possible.

It is inevitable that there will sometimes be negative impacts when allocating certain sites. In a largely rural district, for instance, there are relatively few brownfield sites and so many greenfield sites

Appendix Page 64


need to be allocated. However, the sites chosen are those assessed to have the most positive and least negative impacts

19931 - Phillip

Jeans Homes

Ltd (Phillip

Jeans Homes

Ltd) [7358]

Support results of the Sustainability Appraisal in principle however would suggest that site 530 has capacity for 300 rather than 200 dwellings to maximise the social and economic benefits of the proposal

Comments noted. The Joint Core Strategy allocates between 100-200 new dwellings for Loddon/Chedgrave. The Council have allocated to the upper limit of this requirement and do not propose to increase the size of the allocation at site 530

19110 - Mr &

Mrs J Smith

[7931]

Yes Comment noted

19949 -

Durrants

(Richard

Prentice) [1407]

Yes Comment noted

19503 - Dr

Gibson [7575]

Yes Comment noted

18967 - Mr A

Hall [2112]

Very appropriate Comment noted

19799 -

Durrants

(Richard

Prentice) [1407]

Yes Comment noted

Appendix Page 65


18959 - Mr L

Gardner [9278]

Yes the approach has been appropriate with the details outlined

Comment noted

19780 - Armstrong Rigg Planning (Ms Charlotte Wyn) [9605]

It is considered that the approach taken is appropriate and that the scale of development within settlements is proportionate to the needs of the housing markets and reflects the provision of local services and needs within each settlement to support such additions to the population. The assessment criteria ensures only the most suitable sites with the ability to deliver housing within the plan period have been incorporated. (Refer to scanned rep)

Comment noted

18984 - Mr

Robert

Hadingham

[9452]

Yes, likely significant effects of a development should be tested. Sustainable development being the key test, especially in relationships to existing services in the village

Having adequate services is a key consideration in the acceptability (or otherwise) of all potential sites

Appendix Page 66

Summary of Main Issue Council's AssessmentRepresentations Nature

How do I comment on the sites that have been suggested?

Q4 Do you have any comments on the site checklist that the Council will use when assessing sites?

Action

Many of the sites are areas of outstanding natural beauty ( or have an abundance of wildlife in the trees, streams and hedgerows already endangered, wihtout additional aggrevation) and have access by publicly marked footpaths which would be lost to Hingham and surrounding residents who regularly use them rambling, on walks and exercising dogs

The current site checklist lists a number of statutory and local environmental designations and public rights of way. A detailed site assessment of invidual sites at preferred options will flag up any particular issues on individual sites

8534 - Mrs Elizabeth McWilliam [7179]

Comment None

All services are layed to siteAll road in layed to siteFlexibility to the village needs

Comments noted. The Council will be undertaking a detailed assessment of individual sites at the preferred options stage

6512 - Mr Ian Grady [6567] Comment None

Is also missing Local Geodiversity Sites.

(I am unsure whether only previous designations from the South Norfolk Local Plan are included here. If RIGS were not named within that plan, then that is an old deficiency.)

Site checklist was amended to include 'Geodiversity Action Plan Area'. However, the Norfolk Geodiversity Action Plan does not identify sites which should be protected. This element is therefore not reflected on the site assessment tables, but comments in the Geological Society of Norfolk representations have been taken on board.

9568 - Geological Society of Norfolk(GSN) (Ms Jenny Gladstone) [3379]

Comment Checklist amended

Checklist should be raised to reflect the fact that some urban extensions will provide services, facilities and infrastructure as part of development but which do not currently exist.

The checklist includes a note of the services and facilities within the settlement. Only very large sites would support the provision of additional core services as part of a developement proposal. Since this would not apply to most sites, the checklist was not amended. However, any significant development in a settlement would be expected to provide facilities and services to support and enhance the existing local provision. This benefit is recognised as one of the reasons for concentrating development, and at appropriate locations this approach will be taken in allocating sites.

10162 - Hopkins Homes (Robert Eburne) [7138]

Comment None

Numbering system on map and list is not very easy to understand

Comment noted. The Council presented a large number of suggested sites for consultation in the clearest and most understandable way that it could.

6379 - Mrs J Teny [6517] Comment None

Page 1 of 19Statement of Consultation Issues & Options Appendix 2 September 2013

Appendix 4 - Comments to SA Site Assessment

Appendix Page 67




Action

Councillor Tim East has raised concerns regarding the inclusion and labelling of SHLAA sites in the consultation, suggesting that consulting on those sites where the landowner has not promoted them is confusing to the members of the public and restricting potential comments on those sites. Councillor East suggested further confusion is cause by consulting on sites which are in landscape designation areas and are therefore extremely unlikely to come forward for development

The SHLAA is a background document to the JCS and looks at the potential for development on larger sites in and around the Norwich fringe, the main towns and key service centres. The sites in the SHLAA could have potential for development but in many cases the ownership or willingness to develop the land is not known. The Council have included SHLAA sites as part of the consultation to present a full picture of potential sites for development but the 2010 consultation clearly explained what a SHLAA site was.

11619 - Norfolk County Council (Councillors) (Cllr Tim East) [7319]

Comment None

Natural England would like to see the following designations included Local Nature Reserves, Roadside Nature Reserves etc. Greater clarification of 'green infrastructure corridor'. Designation of 'Biodiversity Action Plan Areas' should be explicit that this refers to both BAP habitats and species

The site checklist will be amended following this consultation and will be modified so that the sites can be scored and weighted against each other. There will be an opportunity to make these changes at this stage. If particular designations/categories are not incorporated into the final site checklist then there will always be an opportunity for officers to add individual comments about specific sites, such as if a Local Nature Reserve or Roadside Nature Reserve applies.

10296 - Natural England (Ms Helen Ward) [3917]

Comment Site checklist to be amended to incorporate designations and changes suggested by Natural England

No Noted6028 - Alburgh Parish Council (Mrs J Ellis) [6442]

Comment None

Thank you for consulting Norfolk County Council, these are officer level comments and are subject to revision as the site selection and sustainability process continues. A desktop study has been undertaken which has identified that many sites could have landscape issues.

Comments noted. More detailed comments at subsequent stages in the process would be welcomed

11617 - Norfolk County Council (Environment, Archaeology Conservation, Minerals and Waste) (The Manager Norfolk Biodiversity Partnership) [7316]

Comment None

No comment, understand need for housing but areas with good rail/water/road connections close to Norwich should be considered for high density housing before more challenging rural areas are considered

Agreed. In preparing the Site Specific DPD the Council will follow the settlement hierarchy in the JCS which directs the larger developments to the areas closest to Norwich and then follows a hierarchy of development down to smaller rural communities which are planned to have no new development. The settlement hierarchy is based upon access to services and facilities.

6329 - Mr P Bodie [1598] Comment None



Appendix Page 68




Action

Unclear how the 'small sites in the NPA' allowance (1800) homes will be distributed. Timewell Properties suggest that Little Melton is capacble of accommodting a proportion of these homes. The criteria for allocating these sites should also be subject to consultation.

The Sustainabiluty Appraisal Framework focuses too much on negative impacts of development, should also recognise the positive impacts. Should positively and specifically identify those development sites that contribute to the objective of securing sustainable development.

An important role of the SA process will be to appraise the options for distribution of the 1800 in the NPA to ensure that the best performing sustainable distribution of numbers to the most appropriate settlements is achieved

The current site checklist is an information gathering tool. Further work is being unertaken on how to weight/score the sites based on the information in the checklist to ensure a sustainable assessent of sites and distribution of development. The distribution of the 'small sites in the NPA' allowance of 1800 homes will be undertaken at the preferred options stage, once a full assessment has been made of all the sites put forward for development

6685 - Timewell Properties Ltd (Timewell Properties Ltd) [7306]

Comment None

The 2010 site specific Map 19 shows most suggested sites to be at odds with the site checklist categories notably accessibility, services and facilities, viability, land use deisgnation, environment and existing SNLP land use categories which are ENV3. yet again, the suggested sites represent the financial greed of landowners and developers rather than the needs of the town of Diss and its non-landowning residents

The current site checklist is an information gathering tool. Further work is being undertaken on how to weight/score the sites based on the information in the checklist. Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scored at the preferred options stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been chosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been consdiered to be inappropriate for development

6868 - Dr Barbara Thomas [6613] Comment None

Must be close to public transport routes e.g. bus routes

Site checklist includes accessibility to public transport as one of the criteria

7064 - Mr J Cogman [1767] Comment None

Need to consider the potential health effects of electricity power lines on occupants of nearby houses

Comments noted. Considered too detailed for the broad site checklist, however a detailed issue such as this will be considered on an individual site basis as assessments are undertaken.

9412 - Mr John Thain [6775]9422 - Dr Viven Thain [6877]

Comment None

Find it difficult to find information on the Council website

Comments noted8505 - Mr & Mrs R Naish [7175] Comment None



Appendix Page 69




Action

It was decided not to change the terminology on the checklist to allow this section to cover the widest possible range of services; on the checklist there is the option to add supplementary notes. Having assessed the sites, the only services with capacity issues identified were utilities. The Site Assessment Tables therefore used 'utilities' rather than 'services' as the title. Information on deficient capacity in utilities has been fed into the policy wording for preferred sites to address any deficiencies identified by utilities providers.

9393 - Ray Hannent [6938]10059 - Environment Agency (Eastern Region) (Miss Jessica Fraser) [5896]

Comment Any utilities capacity constraints have been translated into policy requirements for preferred sites.

Proximity to local services should also reflect cycling time to them.

Better expressed as 800 metres with walking/cycling time in brackets as individuals' walking/cycling times may vary.

8116 - Mrs Penny Jewkes [6906] Comment None

Hingham - think of road usage - main roads in and out of Hingham

The Site Checklist does include reference to the need for highways improvements. A detailed assessment will be made of individual sites and comments will be sought from Norfolk County Council as the Highways Authority. This will flag up accessibility and highways issues.

9309 - Mr R. Bacon [6872] Comment None

It is not clear to what level this checklist will be used by the council in assessing constraints on sites. If this is the case, there is a need to identify all biodiversity constraints. This should not just include designated sites such as SSSIs and County Wildlife Sites but also include Biodiversity Action Plan Habitats and protected species. It may be necessary for the council to gather additional evidence on BAP habitats as this information is not necessarily held by other bodies.

Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) areas are included on the site checklist under the 'Designations' section. This refers to both habitats and species. BAPs and GI corridors do not feature on the traffic light assessment tables but were assessed as appropriate.

7967 - Norfolk Wildlife Trust (John Hiskett) [912]

Comment BAP included on checklist

We consider that there should be explicit reference to land to be provided for the future development of accommodation to meet the care needs of older people. The need for housing and care is referred to within the Joint Core Strategy and we consider that this need should be included within the search for development sites within South Norfolk.

Officers to note if land has been put forward specifically for accommodation to meet the care needs of older people in the 'suggested land use' box on the site checklist. JCS policies directing the distribution of housing with care will shape policy requirements at appropriate settlements.

7353 - Mr Peter Adams [6279] Comment Application of checklist altered.



Appendix Page 70




Action

The site checklist is an information gathering tool. Further work is being undertaken on how to weight\score the sites based on the information on the checklist. Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scored at the preferred options stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been chosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been considered to be inappropriate for development.

7109 - Zurich Assurance Limited [6689]10124 - Harcombe Development Ltd (Harcombe Developments Ltd) [7410]10180 - Hethersett Land Ltd (Hethersett Land Ltd) [7362] (950b)

Comment None

Have not seen checklist The site assessment checklist was included as part of the consultation material

5917 - Mrs Shirley Thatcher [6386]6602 - Mr P McCarter [6579]7465 - Ms Mary Fairburn [6854]8481 - Mr Nigel Edwards [6975]

Comment None

No comment Noted6542 - Dickleburgh and Rushall Parish Council (Mrs Claire Sparkes) [6575]6635 - Mr Peter Porter [6559]6692 - P Murton [2547]

Comment None

Rural developments should be smaller, eight to 10 houses each development

The number of houses allocated to each settlement is set out in the Joint Core Strategy, which specifies 10-20 houses in each service village. This can not be changed through the site specific DPD process.

6539 - Mr Stewart Read [6574] Comment None

Some areas have no information about existing use or possible development

In some instances no suggested land use has put forward by the person suggesting the site for development and also the Council do not necessarily know what the existing land use is at this stage unless we have been told by the person putting forward the land. This information will be clarified when the sites are subject to a full assessment later in the process

6415 - Mrs May Lukey [6533] Comment None



Appendix Page 71




Action

The current checklist provides guidance on the information to be gathered on each site but provides little guidance as to how the assessment will be undertaken. It is unclear how a site will be considered suitable for allocation when judged againat alternative site options. The Council should publish the criteria that will be used to assess the different site options and policies.

The checklist contains a number of environmental designations from the South Norfolk Local PLan which will effectively be superceded by the LDF process. There will need to be an understanding of how sites will be assessed against these criteria and the weight that will be given to them. Designations such as river valleys do not preclude development and limited weight should be given to them

The current site checklist is an information gathering tool. Further work is being undertaken on how to weight/score the sites based on the information in the checklist. Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scored at the preferred options stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been chosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been considered to be inappropriate for development.

Local designations from the South Norfolk Local Plan will be reviewed. They are included on the checklist so that a full assessment of sites can be undertaken but it doesn't necessarily follow that these designations would preclude development. Some information on the checklist will be weighted/scored higher than other information

9881 - Ms F Whalley [3073] (061) Comment None

Current checklist provides guidance on information to be gathered but provides little guidance as to how the assessment will be undertaken. It is unclear how it will be determined whether a site is considered suoitable for allocation when judged against alterntiave site options. The Council should publish the criteria that will be used to assess the different site options and policies.

The checklist contains a number of environmental designations from the South Norfolk Local Plan, which will be superceded by the LDF process. There needs to be an understanding on the weight which will be given to them as these designations do not necessarily preclude development .

It is noted that highways information will be based on consultation with Norfolk County Council. This approach is welcomed.

Finally a general point is that development of a site may actually provide some of the services and facilities defined within the checklist



Support for consultation with Norfolk County Council regarding highways issues is noted.

It is also noted that the development of a site may actually provide some of the services and facilities defined within the checklist and this will need to be considered when the individual sites are assessed

9561 - Sunguard (Sunguard C/O Agent) [7407]

Comment None



Appendix Page 72




Action

The current checklist provides guidance on the information to be gathered on each site but provides little guidance as to how the assessment will be undertaken. It is unclear how sites will be scored/weighted and how the information obtained through the checklist will be used to determined whether a site is considered suitable for allocation.

The checklist contains a list of designations from the South Norfolk Local Plan which will effectively be superceded by the LDF process. There needs to be an understanding of how sites will be assessed against these criteria and the weight that will be given to them. These designations do not necessarily preclude development.



10095 - Harcombe Development Ltd (Harcombe Developments Ltd) [7410] (1005)

Comment None



Appendix Page 73




Action

Whilst we support the intention to allocate sufficient land in Poringland / Framingham Earl for up to 200 homes, it is unclear from the current consultation how the additional 'small sites in the NPA' allowance (1,800 homes) will be distributed amongst the South Norfolk settlements in the NPA, including Poringland / Framingham Earl.This should be made clearer, particularly as the Joint Core Strategy currently provides no clear guidance about how the homes will be distributed within the NPA. The criteria for allocating the 'small sites in the NPA' allowance should also be subject to consultation. Poringland / Framing ham Earl is a suitable location to accommodate further growth beyond that specified in the Joint Core Strategy.It is not totally clear how the proposed site specific policies/designations, i.e. Cittaslow in Diss, Poringland Urban Drainage Structure etc and other site specific policies will be assessed.

The Checklist should include an assessment of how sites could contribute towards delivering other settlement specific aims/policies. For instance, in Poringland/Framingham Earl's case the Poringland Urban Drainage Strategy. We suggest that the Framingham Earl site is key to achieving this policy as it includes an important element of the village's drainage system, which has the potential to be improved through the site's development for the benefit of the wider village. (See attached supporting documents).

Some of these issues are considered too detailed for the purposes of the site checklist. Settlement specific policies/aims will be considered when looking at more detailed site selection in specific settlements.

10348 - Hibbert & Key [7363] Comment N\A

I understand that additional sites are to be added to the list - fuller information required

Additional sites will be added to the list if they are suggested for development at future stages in the DPD process. It is not possible to provide fuller information information about additional sites at the moment. This will be made available as and when such sites come forward

8572 - Mr Frederick Winter [7187] Comment None

Grown areas, places to wlk, leave some countryside Comments noted6214 - Mr Kevin Hogan [6411] Comment None

I find the checklist and form totally confusing Comments noted5931 - Mrs A Hollidge [2211] Comment None



Appendix Page 74




Action

If development is required it should be reasonable, proportional in size and sensitive in nature. It should be an extension to existing residential areas where roads can cope and disruption is minimal

Comments noted. These criteria are similar to the ones the Council will be looking at when making a detailed assessment of sites and deciding where new allocations should be made.

6209 - Mr Christopher Doggett [6410]

Comment None

National Policy Guidelines have been changed from density quota per hectare

Comments noted. The checklist has a box for recording the suggested density of the development. The Council have assumed a density of 30 per hectare as a rough guide when assessing sites but actual densities may vary depending on local circumstances, such as the nature of surrounding development or the particular characteristics of the site

8371 - N B Woods Drawing Services (Mr Nick Woods) [1381]

Comment None

The current checklist provides guidance on the information to be gathered on each site but provides little guidance as to how the assessment will be undertaken. It is unclear how information obtained through the checklist will be weighted/scored and how it will be determined that a site is considered suitable for allocation

The checklist includes a number of designations from the South Norfolk Local PLan which will effectively be superceded by the LDF process. There needs to be an understanding of how sites will be assessed against these criteria and the weight that will be given to them. Such designations do not preclude development and limited weight should be given to them

Development of a site may actually provide some of the services and facilities defined within the checklist

The current site checklist is an information gathering tool. Further work is being undertaken on how to weight/score the sites based on the information in the checklist. Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scored at the preferred optiosn stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been choosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been considered to be inappropriate for development

Local designations from the South Norfolk Local Plan will be reviewed. They are included on the current site checklist so that a full assessment of sites can be undertaken but it does not necessarily follow that these designations would preclude development. Some information on the cheklist will b weighted/scored higher than other information.

The site assessment process will need to recognise that some of the larger sites being proposed would actually be able to provide some of the services and facilities defined within the checklist. A detailed assessment of individual sites will be undertaken at the preferred options stage and the ability for sites to provide additional services and facilities will be reflected at this stage

10079 - Harcombe Development Ltd (Harcombe Developments Ltd) [7410]

Comment None



Appendix Page 75




Action

Are the owners of the sites prepared for change? All the sites to be assessed against the site assessment checklist have been suggested by landowners, developers or their agents so the owners of sites are prepared for the potential change to their land.

6344 - Mrs Penelope Wilson-Downe [6481]

Comment None

Overall this seems to cover most of the issues that need to be considered in assessing suitability and deliverability and so informing choices about which sites to allocates for development. Ownership and viability are often key factors. In this respect it may be helpful to note whether a developer/housebuilder is involved in promoting the site as this can positively influence timing and funding issues. In relation to brownfield sites it would also be helpful to note whether there are any known "abnormal" costs due to ground conditions/contamination that could affect viability.

Site checklist doesn't specifically identify whether a developer/housebuilder is promoting the site but the checklist does ask about anticipated timescales for development and ownership of land (including whether it is being actively promoted). Site checklist also asks about site contamination, with an opportunity to add extra detail.

9544 - Persimmon Homes Ltd Anglia Region (Persimmon Homes Ltd Anglia Region) [7356]

Comment None

Pleased to see that designated heritage assets are included within the checklist. Issues of wider character and the setting of heritage assets will need to be incorporated into the final assessment. This may be a further level of appraisal based on additional information held by the Council. We recommend that the Historic Characterisation and Sensitivity Assessment is complemented by more detailed appraisal work, including conservation are appraisals.

The current site assessment checklist does consider whether sites are located within or impact upon any of the listed designations, which would include the wider character and setting of heritage assets. The assessment of sites will also be influenced by detailed comments from statutory consultees such as English Heritage. The current site assessment checklist is an information gathering tool. Further work is being undertaken on how to weight/score the sites based on information in the checklist. Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scored at the preferred options stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been choosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been considered to be inappropriate for development. The Council are planning to undertake reviews of particular Conservation Areas across the district

11622 - English Heritage (Katherine Fletcher) [930]

Comment None

If you are trying to encourage people to use public transport then it should be less than 800m (say 500m or less) to a bus route.

Information on public transport access will be provided by Norfolk County Council. This information will only be sought for those sites that are considered suitable for development after some weighting\scoring has taken place. Discussion to take place with Norfolk County Council about what standards they use for distance from a bus route.

8458 - N Thompson [2974] Comment None



Appendix Page 76




Action

The checklist provides guidance on information to be gathered on each site but provides little guidance as to how the assessment will be undertaken. It is unclear how the information obtained throught the checklist will be used to determine whether a site is considered suitable for allocation. How will sites/policies be scored or weighted. The Council should publish the criteria that will be used to assess the different site options and site policies.

Site checklist contains a number of designations from the South Norfolk Local Plan which may be superceded by the LDF process. There needs to be an understanding of how sites will be assessed against these criteria and the weight that will be given to them as these deisgnations do not necessarily preclude development

The current site checklist os an information gathering tool. Further work is being undertaken on how to weight/score the sites based on the information in the checklist. Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scored at the preferred options stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been chosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been considered to be inappropriate for development.

Local designations from the South Norfolk Local Plan will be reviewed. They are included on the current site checklist so that a full assessment of sites can be undertaken but it doesn't necessarily follow that these designations would preclude development. Some information on the checklist will be weighted/scored higher than other information

9897 - Bidwells (Mr Graham Bloomfield) [1435] (092)

Comment None

Yes. It is suggested that the section on Highways and Accessibility is expanded/changed to provide a broader level of understanding of the impact of proposed sites onto the trunk road. As the number of trunk road junctions are relatively few in number, it should be easy to identify where most of the traffic from any site would access the trunk road and 'his would consequently provide at a glance the potential for cumulative impacts of various sites within a vicinity.

In combination of all the relative factors it should be possible to give an indication of overall sustainability.

Suggested Changes:Impact on Trunk Road: Low/Medium/High Likely first point of access onto trunk road: ....Is the site considered sustainable?: Low/Medium/High

Information on highway improvement will be provided by Norfolk County Council. This informationwill only be sought for those sites that are considered suitable for development after some weighting/scoring has taken place. Norfolk County Council to be asked to provide information regarding the level of impact on trunk road and whether the site would be the first point of access onto a trunk road.

10206 - Highways Agency (Mr Eric Cooper) [3700]

Comment None



Appendix Page 77




Action

Map not clear, needs to be more detailed so man in street can understand. What is meant by settlements in Q1 and Q2

The Council had a large number of different sites to show on maps as part of the consultation and it is considered that the information was presented in the clearest way possible. The Council did not want to present too much detailed information on the maps as then they become more difficult to understand. More detail about each site was presented on an accompanying background table. The word 'settlement' in questions 1 and 2 refers to a particular village/town or place where people live. The JCS is settlement based and this approach has been continued through into the Site Specifics DPD

5942 - Mr Hollidge [6429] Comment None

Add the details of the natural watercourse and ponds. Officers to note if land contains any natural watercourses or ponds under 'current land use' box on site checklist.

7598 - Mr & Mrs A Hedges [7089] Comment Application of checklist altered.

The checklist shows no indication of the size of suggested development (i.e. no. of houses).

Checklist does include a box for 'potential number of units'. This was orignially assessed using a guide of 30 dwellings per hectare, but after individually assessing sites, the number of potential dwellings on preferred sites reflects site constraints and surrounding context.

8568 - Mr & Mrs Topliff [7186] Comment None

Sites adjacent to scheduled monuments should be refused unless they can clearly demonstrate that development would not adversely affect the setting of adjacent monuments. Allocations containing or adjacent to listed buildings would also have to demonstrate that development would not have an adverse impact.

Following site allocation the Historic Environment Record (HER) should be consulted prior to application for planning permision and appropriate assessments and statements should be submitted

Comments noted and will be taken into consideration through the assessment and allocation of sites

11612 - Norfolk County Council (Environment, Archaeology Conservation, Minerals and Waste) (Mr Ken Hamilton) [3698]

Comment None



Appendix Page 78




Action

The current checklist provides guidance on the information to be gathered on each site but provides little guidance as to how to assessment will be undertaken.

It is unclear how the information obtained through the checklist will be used to determine whether a site is considered suitable for allocation when judged against alternative site options; or how site specific policies/designations will be assessed against alternative proposals. For instance, whether assessed sites/policies would be given a score against the items on the checklist, or whether assessment items will be weighted according to importance/relevance. The Council should publish the criteria that will be used to assess the different site options and site specific policies/designations

The current site checklist is an information gathering tool. Further work is being undertkaen on how to weight/scrore the sites based on the information in the checklist. Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scored at the preferred options stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been chosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been considered to be inappropriate for development

10344 - Mr A. Semmence [2828] Comment None

The list could include a higher priority to developing brownfield sites and a lower priority given to conservation/green sites/even scrubland as vegetation increases the value and quality of a place. Also lower priority should be given to agricultural land, which will become increasingly important as the population grows and food imports become more expensive

The current site checklist is an information gathering tool. Further work is being undertaken on how to weight/score the sites based on the information in the checklist e.g. is a brownfield site of higher priority than a greenfield site, should development be on high quality agricultural land? Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scroed at the preferred options stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been choosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been considered inappropriate for development

9263 - Karen Dunn [5621] Comment None

Do not believe CPO's are appropriate on moral grounds

Comments noted. The Council would only persue CPO in very exceptional circumstances

10066 - Peter & Dawn Durrant [1906]

Comment None



Appendix Page 79




Action

The site checklist does not include any reference to sensitivities noted in the JCS in relation to Wymondham. The JCS highlights a number of other sensitivities in terms of the settlement identity, the potential for coalescence with Hethersett; and the historic setting of the town and Abbey. These should both be considered in the checklist.

Given the status of the plan with the Government's intention to revoke Regional Strategies it may be best to identify the services within the checklist and remove the reference to the East of England Plan.

When assessing the results of the checklist is important that all the sites are assessed fairly and equally. There is a danger that some of the sites do not score as well as others due to lack of information. The Council should take care to ensure appropriate and comparative weighting is attributed to each point.

Checklist does mention the gap between Wymondham and Hethersett under 'areas of open land (SNLP ENV2)' under the designations section of the checklist. Officers to consider historic setting of town/abbey under the 'current land use/surrounding land use' boxes on the site checklist.

8247 - Endurance Estates Limited (Mr Tim Holmes) [6236]

Comment None

The checklist should set out whether there is a technical and deliverable solution to mitigate highway impact.

The checklist should inlcude an assessment of whether the site can reasonably deliver new/improved public transport facilities. Should include an assessment of the frequency of bus services and whether journey to work services are feasible.

The checklist should include a box to acknowledge where site promotion agreements/joint ventures are in place

The current site checklist includes a general section on the costs of highways improvements. It is intended to consult Norfolk County Council Highways about the sites suggested for development and their advice will be followed regarding the acceptability of the development in highways terms and whether there is likely to be a technical and deliverable solution to mitigate highway impact

The current checklist includes a general section on public transport. In the case of large sites it will need to be considered through the site assessment process whether the site has the potential to deliver new or improved public transport. As part of work into the settlement hierarchy in the JCS a detailed assessment of the frequency of bus services and whether there was a journey to work service was made and this information will fed into the site assessment process.

Whether a site is covered by promotion agreements/joint ventures will be explored at the detailed assessment stage and noted where relevant

11714 - Wrenbridge (Wrenbridge (Harts Farm)) [7364]

Comment None



Appendix Page 80




Action

No more sites, do not need more houses in Long Stratton, no work or jobs in Norfolk

The Site Specific DPD must be prepared to be in conformity with the JCS. The JCS states the number of houses that will be allocated at particular locations. The JCS allocates 1800 new houses at Long Stratton

7394 - Mr and Mrs Everett [6834] Comment None

Brownfield commercial sites should be given priority The site checklist in its current form is an information gethering tool. Further work is being undertaken on how to weight/score the sites based on information in the checklist and which categories should be given priority. Further information will be made available on how the sites have been weighted/scored at the preferred options stage so it will be clear why certain sites have been chosen as preferred sites for development and why other sites have been considered to be inappropriate for development

5854 - Mr and Mrs Bowers [1609] Comment Further work to weight/score the sites based on information on the site checklist to be undertaken at preferred options stage

It would be useful to have site sizes noted to help ascertain their usefulness

The site checklist has a box for site size to be noted. In relation to the maps there is an accompanying table of supporting information to be used in conjunction with the map and this gives the site size for each site

5991 - Mr AL & Mrs MRL Howard [1249]

Comment None

The Planning Authority must ensure that any approvals for housing integrate and enhance the character of the town

Comments noted. The site checklist includes boxes for current, previous and surrounding land use as well as tick boxes for whether the site is adjacent or removed from the settlement boundary. There are also many other categories on the site checklist and all of these will help to ensure that any sites chosen for housing development will be well integrated with the existing settlement and will not adversely affect the form and character of the settlement

6138 - Mr R.M. Meadows [6408] Comment None

It is understood that all relevant policies have been identified and will be considered during the site selection process. In particular, Appropriate Assessments will take place for proposed development near the European Special Areas of Conservation (Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens; Norfolk Valley Fens; The Broads; River Wensum) and Broadland Special Protection Area. More site-specific comments will be available at later stages of the LDF process

Comments noted. More site specific comments at later stages of the LDF process would be welcome

11620 - Norfolk County Council - Ecology, Flood & Water (mr Ed Stocker) [6268]

Comment None



Appendix Page 81




Action

Fine - no problem Support noted6489 - Mr A Perry [6532] Comment

No Noted6130 - Dr Martin James Cameron [6400]

Comment None

Adequacy of existing infrastructure - Hethersett already has parking issues, no NHS dentist, no bank - all creating travel needs

The ability of a settlement to accommodate additional growth has already been determined through the preparation of the JCS. Large scale growth in a particular settlement may lead to increased demand and therefore provision of infrastructure

6437 - Mr A Truesdell [6510] Comment None



Appendix Page 82




Action

The site checklist at Appendix 2 contains no indication as to the perceived relative significance of the various elements/designations described in that checklist. It would be inappropriate to proceed with the preparation of the DPD/AAP on the basis of a simple scoring system that does not take into account the potential significance of the elements under consideration. Furthermore, the checklist should take fully into consideration the fact that apposite mitigation strategies will be entirely appropriate in the context of the development of particular tracts of land. In certain circumstances, this may mean the evaluation of different site boundaries to those shown via the current consultation exercise in order to exclude from the larger blocks of land those smaller areas which may give rise to limited, localised concern in environmental terms.

Page 10 of the present consultation document notes that the wider assessment will be undertaken within the context provided by the settlement hierarchy established in the JCS. In the particular circumstance of Long Stratton, Policy 9 of the JCS describes a growth location that is expected to accommodate at least 1,800 dwellings and the provision of a bypass for the settlement. The process described at page 10 of the consultation document should fully take into consideration the policy expectation enshrined in the JCS and the ability to deliver a bypass at Long Stratton.

In the light of the contribution that we have already made to the evolving JCS, we would maintain that the scoring of the potential of a particular site should take into account also those facilities that the landowner/developer has already committed, to the knowledge of SNC, to provide on that and related land. In evaluating the potential of the land described in this submission, we would anticipate that the assessment would acknowledge that development on the land concerned will deliver the bypass and enable Long Stratton to achieve the degree of self-containment anticipated in the Vision for the settlement prepared by the GNDP.

The robustness of the site checklist would be

In considering sites for development it will be recognised that mitigation strategies may be appropriate in the case of some particular pieces of land. The purpose of the site checklist is to gather information on the various sites that have been suggested. Further work will then take place to weight/score the sites.

10254 - Leeder Family [7266] Object None



Appendix Page 83




Action

significantly enhanced if, as noted above, it incorporated a mechanism by which appropriate weighting is given to key policy considerations. In the case of Long Stratton, we would suggest that the site checklist should clearly establish the appropriateness of a particular location in implementing the integrated development package for Long Stratton established in the JCS. Areas of land that can plainly contribute to a comprehensive and coordinated approach to the enlargement of the settlement should be perceived to essentially achieve a higher score than those that would give rise to a more dispersed development pattern, reducing the degree of coordination that should arise through the implementation of a whole settlement strategy. The tracts of land allocated to implement the objectives of the JCS should lead to the establishment of a self-contained town as described in the emerging Vision for Long Stratton prepared by the GNDP. In the context of the Long Stratton AAP, we would suggest that the Site Checklist should more directly reflect the nature of the development programme envisaged in the JCS. As presently drafted, the checklist may not lead necessarily to the identification of tracts of land which, taken together, can achieve a self-contained community which is able to benefit from the bypass and related aspects that form part of the policy base of the JCS.

As noted at page 6 of the Sustainability Appraisal Framework, the Area Action Plans are expected to set out the detailed policies, phasing, infrastructure and delivery mechanisms for each of the target areas in order to ensure growth is delivered in a co-ordinated and comprehensive manner. This comprehensive approach aims to ensure that well-integrated, sustainable development takes place in

The size/detail on the maps are too small. Proper maps should have been produced so sites could be clearly identified

The Council produced the best and clearest maps that it was possible to produce at the time and given the large number of different sites that were being consulted upon. Each settlement had its own individual map as part of the consultation so all sites suggested for development in that location could be clearly identified and related to each other.

6102 - Mr J.C. Hobson [6404] Object None



Appendix Page 84




Action

The checklists don't demonstrate the pressure the local services would be put under and the fact that the road network locally is inadequate to sustain increased usage

The settlement hierarchy in the JCS was prepared based on the level of services and facilities in settlements and their ability to accommodate growth. The site checklist looks at the services and facilities in the settlement and highways improvements. The detailed assessment of each site, with comments from statutory consultees such as Norfolk County Council Highways will flag up any particular issues related to an individual site

8661 - Mrs Beaton [7201] Object None

Support for site assessment checklist Support noted6703 - Dr David Lovell-Badge [6395]7662 - kimberley and carleton forehoe parish council (Mrs C Moore) [7096]7969 - Mr Paul Eggett [6907]8778 - Mr M R Allsop [4169]9408 - J Martin Shaw [6022]

Support None

Good checklist that takes into account the variety and mix or services and facilities that should determine whether further housing, more cars and a greater population can realistically be supported by the settlement in question

Support noted8017 - Geldeston Parish Plan Working Group (Mr John Crowfoot) [7121]

Support None



Appendix Page 85

1

Sustainability Appraisal Framework Appendix 5

1) Location principles Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives Investigating Question

or Decision Making Criteria

Assessing the impacts (++ / + / 0 / - / - - / ?)

Nature of Effects and Overall Assessment:

Quantify where possible. Include justification, comments and recommendations e.g. for mitigation measures ENVIRONMENTAL

FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term

ENV1: To maintain and enhance biodiversity, geodiversity, species and habitat quality, and avoid habitat fragmentation Decision-making criteria

Will nature conservation sites of international, national and local value be adversely affected by development of the site?

Will development of the site increase the number or diversity of sites of nature conservation interest? Does it seek opportunities to integrate biodiversity into the development?

Will it adversely affect sites of geological interest?

Will it contribute to achieving BAP targets and conserve/enhance species and habitat diversity?

Indicator-based concerns

Ability to enhance and protect Ramsar sites, SPAs, SACs, SSSIs, CWSs and river quality

Limiting detrimental change to areas designated for their intrinsic environmental value

0 0 0 No direct significant effects.

ENV2: To limit or reduce vulnerability to climate change, including minimising the risks from flooding Decision-making criteria

Will development of the site minimise the risk of flooding?

Will it help reduce the vulnerability of agriculture to changes in weather patterns?

Is it promoting sustainable use of flood zones by ensuring that development is appropriate to the Flood Zone & passes Sequential Test & exception Test & requirements of PPS25

Does it encourage habitat relocation or compensation?

Does the proposal make use of SUDS?


Reducing the number of planning applications permitted in flood zones

Reducing the vulnerability of planning applications permitted in flood zones


ENV3: To maximise the use of renewable energy solutions and reduce contributions to climate change

Will it encourage efficient use of energy?

Is it promoting a sequential approach to the pattern of development?

Will it reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases, including from energy and traffic?

Will it increase the use of renewable energy sources?


Improving the provision of renewable energy generating schemes

Reducing carbon dioxide emissions across the district

+ + + The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy promotes a sequential approach to new development and reduces the need to travel to services and facilities with commensurate reductions in emissions. JCS Policy 3 provides for the increased use of renewable energy.

Appendix Page 86

2

1) Location principles (continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives

Investigating Question or

Decision Making Criteria



Quantify where possible.

Include justification, comments and recommendations eg. for mitigation measures

ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

ENV4: To reduce the effect of traffic on the environment Decision-making criteria

Will it reduce traffic volume or congestion?

Will it reduce the need to travel?

Will it reduce the effect of HGV traffic on people and environment?

Will it increase the % of journeys using non-car modes?

Indicator-based concerns Encouraging the use of non-car modes of transport

++ ++ ++ The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy reduces the need to travel to jobs, services and facilities with commensurate reductions in emissions while increasing the potential for the use of non-car modes of transport.

ENV5: To improve air quality and minimise noise, vibration and light pollution Decision-making criteria

Will it reduce emissions of atmospheric pollution?

Will it improve air quality?

Can it improve the ambiance of local areas?


Minimising the instances of particulate, NO2 pollution

Trying to avoid the need for Air Quality Management Areas

+ + + The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy reduces the need to travel to jobs, services and facilities with commensurate reductions in emissions arising form the increased potential for the use of non-car modes of transport.

ENV6: To maintain and enhance the distinctiveness and quality of landscapes, townscapes and the historic environment Decision-making criteria

Will it protect the quality of landscapes and townscapes, or mitigate the effects of inappropriate development?

Will the site make a positive contribution to the local area, and enhance the character of local landscapes?

Will it reduce the amount of derelict, degraded and under-used land?

Will the District’s heritage be preserved and/or enhanced?


Listed buildings, scheduled ancient monuments and all other heritage assets considered ‘at risk’

Conservation Area Appraisals and management plans

+ + + The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy provides the potential for the re-use of vacant and derelict land with commensurate benefits for the quality of townscapes and landscapes, the latter arising from a reduced spread of development throughout the countryside.

Appendix Page 87

3


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term

ENV7: To minimise the loss of undeveloped land and conserve and improve the quality of soil resources Decision-making criteria

Will it avoid the use of productive agricultural land?

Will it minimise the irreversible use of soil resources?


% of new dwellings built on previously developed land

+

+ + The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy provides the potential for the re-use of vacant and derelict land with commensurate benefits arising from a reduced need for development on agricultural land.

ENV8: To improve water qualities and provide for sustainable sources of supply and sustainable use Decision-making criteria

Does it conserve groundwater resources?

Will it reduce water consumption?

Will the supply of water be efficient in terms of the overall network?

What is impact upon water quality? Will it improve ecological status of waterbodies as required by WFD


Planning permissions granted contrary to Environment Agency water quality advice

Water consumption per head

++ ++ ++ The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy enables the more efficient provision of a water supply network. The impacts of treated foul water discharges to water courses will be restricted by the combined actions of Anglian Water, the Environment Agency and Natural England and resulting development constraints.

ENV9: To minimise the production of waste and increase recycling Decision-making criteria

Will it result in less waste being produced or requiring disposal?

Will it facilitate better community recycling facilities?

Will it minimise consumption of resources e.g. use local materials and sustainably sourced products?


Reducing the number of kilograms of household waste collected per head

Increasing the % of waste that is recycled or composted


Summary: SA vs. Environmental Objectives

The benefits of reducing the need to travel, traffic and traffic emissions; the townscape and landscape benefits arising from the re-use of brownfield land and the ability to make the efficient use of water resources meet most of the environmental objectives (i.e. ENV3-ENV8).

Appendix Page 88

4


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term

S1: To provide everybody with the opportunity to live in a decent, suitable and affordable home Decision-making criteria

Will it reduce homelessness?

Will it reduce housing need and ensure housing provision addresses the needs of all?

Will it increase the range and affordability and quality of housing stock for all social groups?


Affordable housing completions per year against overall housing completions

Reducing the number of unfit private sector dwellings


S2: To reduce poverty, inequality and social exclusion Decision-making criteria

Will it reduce poverty and social exclusion in those areas most affected?

Will it improve the level of activity available to young people in the District?

Will it support the development of Social Cohesion?

Will it help to reduce levels of deprivation?


% of the population living in the most deprived super output areas of the country

Reducing the numbers of people unemployed

+ + + The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy reduces the need to travel to jobs, services and facilities and improves their accessibility with benefits for social cohesion and reduced social exclusion.

S3: To offer opportunities for all sections of the population to have rewarding and satisfying employment Decision-making criteria

Will it reduce unemployment overall?

Will it improve earnings?

Will it improve access to employment and help to create a better housing-jobs balance?


% of the population of working age in employment

Improving the level of average earnings

0 0 0 No direct significant effects. Accessibility to jobs is covered by Objective S4.

Appendix Page 89

5


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

S4: To improve accessibility to essential services, facilities and the workplace, particularly for those most in need Decision-making criteria

Will it improve accessibility to key local services e.g. health, education, leisure, open space, shops, community and religious facilities?

Will it improve access to employment opportunities?


Improving the effectiveness of public transport to service public facilities

Encouraging the use of non-car modes of transport

++ ++ ++ The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy will improve accessibility to jobs, services and facilities while assisting the viability of their provision.

S5: To improve the education and skills of the population overall Decision-making criteria

Will it improve qualifications and skills of young people?

Will it improve access to schools / education facilities for communities?

Will it encourage opportunities for vocational skills training and improve local links with the workplace?

Will it encourage lifelong learning and training?


Improving the level of school exam performance

Improving the vocational training amongst the working population

0 0 0 No direct significant effects. (Accessibility to education provision is covered by Objective S4).

S6: To improve the health of the population overall Decision-making criteria

Will it improve life expectancy?

Will it improve access to high quality health facilities?

Will it encourage healthy lifestyles? How?


Ability to access GP services

Improving the general life expectancy at birth

0 0 0 No direct significant effects. (Accessibility to health facilities is covered by Objective S4 while healthy lifestyles will be affected by design provisions such as green infrastructure and walking and cycling links).


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

S7: To encourage local community identity and foster mixed communities with co-operative attitudes, helping to reduce anti-social activity Decision-making criteria

Will it reduce actual levels of crime?/ fear of crime?

Will it encourage engagement in community activities?

Will it contribute towards creating mixed and balanced communities?


Levels of crime and the community’s general fear of crime

Ability to create mixed and participative communities, eg. through election turnout

0 0 0 No direct significant effects. Human behaviour and community composition are separate issues to the allocation of development sites.

S8: To improve the quality of where people live Decision-making criteria

Will it improve satisfaction of people with their neighbourhoods?

Indicator-based concerns Residents’ perception of the quality of their neighbourhoods as places to live

0 0 0 No direct significant effects. Personal satisfaction will arise indirectly as a result of the designed environment, green infrastructure provisions and degree of accessibility to jobs, services and facilities.

Summary: SA vs. Social Objectives

The benefits of ensuring good access to services and facilities are significant in reducing social exclusion and providing for enhanced social cohesion in accordance with objectives S2 and S4.

Appendix Page 90

6

1) Location principles (continued)

Sustainability Appraisal Objectives

Investigating Question






ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

EC1: To encourage sustained economic growth Decision-making criteria

Will it strengthen the local economy and support emerging employment uses in the District (e.g. Research, tourism)?

Will it help retain existing businesses?

Will it aid farming diversification?

Will it increase the vitality and viability of Town Centres?


Reducing business premises vacancy rates

More VAT registered businesses in the District

+ + + The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy with improved ease of access to jobs and town centres will assist the take up of jobs, the viability of established centres and boost the local economy.

EC2: To encourage and accommodate both indigenous and inward investment promoting a positive image of the District Decision-making criteria

Will it provide for a variety of locations for businesses?

Will it add to a ready supply of employment premises?

Is it supporting targeted emerging employment types?


Assessing the availability of employment land across the District

Business start ups

+ + + The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy with improved ease of access will provide for a variety of business locations and premises.

EC3: To encourage efficient patterns of movement in support of economic growth

Decision-making criteria

Will it encourage the development of local employment locations/jobs?

Is it located so as to minimise the journey to work?

Will it enhance a group of existing employment generating uses?

Will it encourage mixed use or live / work?

Will it reduce journey times between key employment/service areas?


Travel-to-work by mode data

Reducing the reliance on accessing the workplace via private car

++ ++ ++ The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy will improve their potential ease of access.

Appendix Page 91

7


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

EC4: To improve the social and environmental performance of the economy Decision-making criteria

Will it offer the opportunity for more flexible working?

Will it operate in a way that seeks to minimise impact on the environment?



EC5: To improve economic performance in rural areas Decision-making criteria

Will it encourage rural diversification?

Will it offer sources of employment in rural areas?

Will it improve electronic communication potential?


Planning permissions granted for business use outside towns

+ + + The location of development sites within and adjacent to settlements within the JCS settlement hierarchy will improve the potential availability of employment sites within the rural areas.

Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives Enabling good access to jobs, services and facilities supports their continued viability and economic growth in accordance with objectives EC1-3 and EC5.

Key to Effects Score: ++ Major Positive + Minor Positive 0 Neutral Effect - Minor Negative -- Major Negative ? Uncertain Effect

Overall Conclusions : Significant environmental benefits arise from reducing the need to travel, traffic and traffic emissions, and encouraging the re-use of brownfield land while providing for the most efficient use of water resources. Major social benefits arise from ensuring good access to services and facilities in reducing social exclusion and providing for enhanced social cohesion. Enabling good access to jobs, services and facilities supports their continued viability and overall economic growth.

Appendix Page 92

8

2) Existing Land Use policy (continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term







+ + + The development of existing development land use allocations and the protection of protected rail routes largely provide opportunities for the use of sustainable transport modes. Existing land allocations have been adopted within the context of government planning guidance to reduce the need to travel, while protected rail routes have been intended to provide for the potential re-use for alternatives to the car..

















+ +/0 +/0 Existing land use allocations have beneficial effects on townscapes through the reduction of derelict and underused land, while landscapes benefit from the existing landscape protection policies. The medium to long term effects are less certain due to the unknown impacts of the potential review of landscape protection policies in particular.

Appendix Page 93

9


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term








+ + +/0 Short to medium term benefits will continue to arise from existing housing land allocations pending their reconsideration for re-allocation and the allocation of new housing sites.


















Appendix Page 94

10


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term







+ + + Existing development land allocations have been allocated within the context of government planning policy guidance and thus provide for easy access to services and employment opportunities, pending the consideration for the re-allocation and allocation of new development sites.


















Appendix Page 95

11


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term














Existing land use designations can continue to meet housing needs in response to Objective S1 pending new allocations to meet further growth requirements. Having been allocated in response to government policy to reduce the need to travel, existing allocations are generally in sustainable locations with good access to jobs, services and facilities with regard to Objective S4.

Appendix Page 96

12

2) Existing Land Use policy (continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term









+ + + Employment land allocations, defined primary shopping areas and central business areas will continue to provide a focus for the retention and provision of business opportunities.







Business start ups

+ + + Employment land allocations, defined primary shopping areas and central business areas will continue to provide a focus for the retention and provision of business opportunities.












Appendix Page 97

13


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term













Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives Employment land allocations and town centre designations provide a focus for development with existing accessibility benefits. Longer term benefits will be subject to the state of the economy and the case for their re-designation.


Overall Conclusions: Existing housing land allocations will continue to contribute towards housing need in the short to medium terms until they are completed. Employment land allocations and town centre designations have existing accessibility benefits and will have longer term benefits subject to the state of the economy and the case for re-allocation. Landscape protection policies may have shorter term environmental benefits depending on the outcomes of their potential review as part of the Development Management Policies review. All current development land allocations will provide opportunities for the use of sustainable transport as they have been adopted within the context of government policies to reduce the need to travel.

Appendix Page 98

14

Sustainability Appraisal – Site assessment criteria Appendix 5


3) Undeveloped Land (continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term
























+ + + The protection of higher grade agricultural land and the preferred development where possible of previously developed land in accordance with national planning policy will have continuous benefits for the potential enhancement of townscapes and landscapes.

Appendix Page 99

15


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






+

+ + The protection of higher grade agricultural land and the preferred development where possible of previously developed land in accordance with national planning policy will have continuous benefits for maintaining these aims.



















The main benefits are the potential protection of natural habitats and wildlife corridors associated with prime agricultural land and the potential for the enhancement of townscapes and landscapes as a result of the preferences for predominantly brownfield sites. However as there are relatively few opportunities to provide for the proposed large scale housing growth areas on brownfield land, the potential benefits of this approach may be reduced..

Appendix Page 100

16


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term


























Appendix Page 101

17


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 102

18


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term














There are no direct significant effects on the SA social objectives.

Appendix Page 103

19

3) Undeveloped Land (continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
















Business start ups













Appendix Page 104

20


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term













Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives There are no direct significant effects on SA economic objectives.


Overall Conclusions: The main benefits are the potential protection of natural habitats and wildlife corridors associated with prime agricultural land and the potential for the enhancement of townscapes and landscapes as a result of the preferences for predominantly brownfield sites. However as there are relatively few opportunities to provide for the proposed large scale housing growth areas on brownfield land in particular, the potential benefits of this approach may be reduced..

Appendix Page 105

21


4) Landscape/ townscape/ historic environment designations Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term









0 0 0 No direct significant effects with regard to this objective




















Appendix Page 106

22

4) Landscape/ townscape/ historic environment designations (continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term
























+ + + The relevant designations will have continual benefits for maintaining and enhancing the quality of landscapes, townscapes and the historic environment.

Appendix Page 107

23


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






0

0 0 No direct significant effects with regard to this objective



















The relevant designations will have continual benefits for maintaining and enhancing the quality of landscapes, townscapes and the historic environment in accordance with Objective ENV 6.

Appendix Page 108

24


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term


























Appendix Page 109

25


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 110

26


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + The relevant townscape and historic environment designations will have continual benefits as a basis for maintaining and enhancing the quality of neighbourhoods.


The relevant townscape and historic environment designations will have continual benefits as a basis for maintaining and enhancing the quality of neighbourhoods in accordance with Objective S8..

Appendix Page 111

27

4) Landscape/ townscape/ historic environment designations (continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
















Business start ups













Appendix Page 112

28


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term













Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives There are no direct significant effects with regard to this objective.


Overall Conclusions:

The relevant designations will have continual benefits for maintaining and enhancing the quality of landscapes, townscapes and the historic environment in accordance with Objective ENV 6, and provide a sound as a basis for maintaining and enhancing the quality of some neighbourhoods in accordance with Objective S8..

Appendix Page 113

29


5) Current Land Use Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





























Appendix Page 114

30

5) Current Land Use (continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term







+ + +/0 The re-use of currently vacant sites in developed areas would reduce the requirement for green field development sites and their implied generation of traffic impacts over a wider area. The relative benefits could decrease over time.

















+ + + The appropriate re-use of vacant sites within developed areas would reduce the need for green field sites while enhancing townscapes through good design and the reduction of derelict and under-used land.

Appendix Page 115

31


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






+

+ + The appropriate re-use of vacant sites within developed areas would reduce the need for green field sites and productive agricultural land.



















The re-use of vacant land in existing developed areas would reduce the need for greenfield development and its associated potential increases in traffic impacts on the countryside while enhancing townscapes in accordance with Objectives ENV 4, 6 and 7.

Appendix Page 116

32


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term








+ + The appropriate re-use of vacant sites within developed areas would increase the availability of potential housing sites to serve all housing needs. .


















Appendix Page 117

33


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term







+ + The redevelopment of vacant land in appropriate locations would provide for new services, facilities or job opportunities with good accessibility.


















Appendix Page 118

34


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term














The re-use of vacant land in existing developed areas would provide potential sites to serve all housing needs in locations with good access to jobs and services in accordance with Objectives S1 and S4.

Appendix Page 119

35

5) Current Land Use (continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term









+ + + The redevelopment of vacant land in appropriate locations would have benefits for the commercial health of town centres and the provision of sites available for existing business relocation and expansion.







Business start ups

+ + + The redevelopment of vacant land in appropriate locations would have benefits for the provision of sites available for new and existing businesses and the commercial health of settlements.












Appendix Page 120

36


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + The redevelopment of vacant land in appropriate locations would have benefits for the provision of sites available for new and existing businesses and the commercial health of settlements.

Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives The regeneration of vacant land within settlements would have benefits for the viability of and accessibility to town centres and new and existing businesses in line with Objectives EC 1 ,2 and 5..


Overall Conclusions: The consideration of whether or not existing land uses are likely to continue and the potential for the regeneration of existing vacant land within settlements will have a wide range of benefits for reduced greenfield land take, reduced increases in traffic impacts in the countryside, the availability of well located housing sites with good accessibility to services, and benefits for the viability of town centres and new and existing businesses.

Appendix Page 121

37


6) Ecology/ Biodiversity/Geodiversity Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term









+

+

+

The protection of sites of biodiversity and geodiversity interest and sites subject to local, national and international designations will be achieved by their avoidance or where necessary, protection from the impacts of development through the implementation of mitigation measures in accordance with Joint Core Strategy Policy 1.




















Appendix Page 122

38

6) Ecology/ Biodiversity/Geodiversity (continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 123

39

6) Ecology/ Biodiversity/Geodiversity (Continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






0

0 0 No direct significant effects









+

+

+ The protection of sites of biodiversity interest subject to local, national and international designations including wetlands and the protection of other water resources will be achieved by their avoidance or protection from the impacts of development through the implementation of mitigation measures in accordance with Joint Core Strategy Policy 3.








0 0 0 No direct significant effects


The protection of sites of biodiversity and geodiversity interest subject to local, national and international designations including wetlands and the protection of other water resources will be achieved by their avoidance or protection from the impacts of development through the implementation of mitigation measures in accordance with Joint Core Strategy Policies 1 and 3.

Appendix Page 124

40


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term


























Appendix Page 125

41


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 126

42


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term














There are no direct significant effects on the social objectives.

Appendix Page 127

43

6) Ecology/ Biodiversity/Geodiversity (Continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
















Business start ups













Appendix Page 128

44


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term













Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives There are no direct significant effects on the economic SA objectives.


Overall Conclusions:

The protection of sites of biodiversity and geodiversity interest subject to local, national and international designations including wetlands and the protection of other water resources will be achieved by their avoidance or protection from the impacts of development through the implementation of mitigation measures in accordance with Joint Core Strategy Policies 1 and 3. This protection has positive environmental impacts but no direct significant effects on the social and economic SA objectives.

Appendix Page 129

45

7) Contamination/ Pollution Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term









0 0 0 No direct significant effect




















Appendix Page 130

46


7) Contamination/ Pollution (continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 131

47

Appendix Page 132

48


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






0

0 0 No direct significant effect









+ + + The avoidance of contaminated and polluted sites, or if no alternative, the choice of such sites for development subject to contamination/ pollution mitigation measures should reduce the potential for the adverse impacts of development–related surface water run-off from such sites on groundwater quality. This approach provides for the potential delays in the implementation of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010 which is intended to ensure the provision of suitable drainage measures including Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) to prevent such adverse impacts.










The main environmental benefits are the protection of groundwater resources from potential development –related surface water run-off from contaminated sites pending the implementation of the Flood and Water Management Act 2010.

Appendix Page 133

49


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term


























Appendix Page 134

50


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
























+ + + The recognition of potentially polluted or contaminated sites will ensure their avoidance or appropriate mitigations to reduce potentially adverse impacts on peoples’ health.


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + The recognition of potentially polluted or contaminated sites will ensure requirements for their avoidance or remediation (if suitable alternative sites are not available) to reduce any potentially adverse impacts on peoples’ health. This will reduce potentially adverse impacts on peoples’ satisfaction with their surroundings and quality of life..


There are long term benefits of assessing sites against contamination and pollution criteria to reduce their potential adverse impacts on personal health and peoples’ quality of life. This is especially relevant to the potential reuse of previously developed land which is encouraged by government planning policy guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework..

Appendix Page 135

51

7) Contamination/ Pollution (continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
















Business start ups













Appendix Page 136

52


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term













Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives No direct significant effect.


Overall Conclusions There are long term benefits of assessing sites against contamination and pollution criteria to reduce the potential adverse impacts of their development on groundwater resources and peoples’ health and quality of life. This is especially relevant to the potential reuse of previously developed land which is encouraged by government planning policy guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Appendix Page 137

53


8) Flood Risk Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term



















++ ++ ++ The application of this criteria ensures the protection of development from the adverse impacts of flooding. The approach implemented has largely precluded sites within areas of Flood Risk 2 and 3 subject to the availability of suggested sites in flood Zone 1, the impact of the remaining assessment criteria and mitigations where required.










Appendix Page 138

54

8) Flood Risk (Continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 139

55


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






0

0 0 No direct significant effects.









++ ++ ++ The avoidance of potential development sites within areas of high flood risk avoids a wide range of flood related problems including the potentially adverse impacts of pollution arising from flooded development on water quality and the ecological status of bodies of water.










This assessment criteria ensures the protection of development from the adverse impacts of flooding by largely precluding sites within areas of Flood Risk 2 and 3 subject to the availability of suggested sites in flood Zone 1 and the impact of the remaining assessment criteria. This assessment criteria also ensures the avoidance of the potentially adverse impacts of flooded development on water quality and the ecological status of bodies of water.

Appendix Page 140

56


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term


























Appendix Page 141

57


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 142

58


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












++ ++ ++ The avoidance of potential development sites within areas of high flood risk avoids a wide range of flood related problems thus making a significant positive contribution towards local quality of life.


The avoidance of potential development sites within areas of high flood risk avoids a wide range of flood related problems thus making a positive contribution towards local quality of life.

Appendix Page 143

59

8) Flood Risk (Continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
















Business start ups












++ ++ ++ The avoidance of potential employment development sites within areas of high flood risk avoids a wide range of flood related problems that could have significant adverse impacts on such employment sites’ development, operation and continued viability.

Appendix Page 144

60


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term













Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives The avoidance of potential employment development sites within areas of high flood risk avoids a wide range of flood related problems that could have significant adverse impacts on such sites’ development, operation and continued viability.


Overall Conclusions: Overall there are significant major positive environmental, social and economic benefits of avoiding flood risk areas affecting water quality, flood water run-off related ecological impacts on water bodies, general quality of life and the operation and viability of businesses.

9) Hazardous Zone Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





























Appendix Page 145

61


9) Hazardous Zone (Continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 146

62


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






0

0 0 No direct significant effects.



















No direct significant effects.

Appendix Page 147

63


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term


























Appendix Page 148

64


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
























+ + + A preference for sites outside designated hazardous installation protection zones would have positive benefits for residents’ health and life expectancy overall.

Appendix Page 149

65


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + A preference for sites outside designated hazardous installation protection zones would have potential long term benefits for residents’ quality of life.


A preference for sites outside designated hazardous installation protection zones would have positive benefits for residents’ health, life expectancy and quality of life.

Appendix Page 150

66

9) Hazardous Zone (Continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
















Business start ups













Appendix Page 151

67


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term













Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives No direct significant effects.


Overall Conclusions : The location of development sites outside designated hazardous installation protection zones would have positive social objective benefits for residents’ health, life expectancy and quality of life.

Appendix Page 152

68


10) Public transport access Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term




























+ + + The location of development within 800metres of bus and rail services will provide for their use as alternative transport modes with consequential potential benefits for the reduction of traffic based air pollution.

Appendix Page 153

69

10) Public transport access (Continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term







+ + + The location of development within 800metres of bus and rail services will provide for their use as alternative transport modes with consequential potential benefits for the reduction of traffic.








+ + + The location of development within 800metres of bus and rail services will provide for their use as alternative transport modes with consequential potential benefits for the reduction of traffic and its adverse environmental impacts including air pollution..










Appendix Page 154

70


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






0




















The location of development within 800metres of bus and rail services will provide for their use as alternative transport modes with consequential potential environmental benefits for the reduction of traffic and its adverse environmental impacts including air pollution..

Appendix Page 155

71


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term

























0 0 0 No direct significant overall effects but see Objective S4 regarding access to employment.

Appendix Page 156

72


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term







++ ++ ++ The location of development within 800metres of bus and rail services will provide for their use as alternative transport modes with significant benefits for accessibility to major centres, services, facilities and jobs.


















Appendix Page 157

73


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + The location of development within 800metres of bus and rail services will provide for their potential use as alternative transport modes with significant benefits for accessibility to major centres, services, facilities and jobs, and hence satisfaction with the quality of neighbourhoods.


The location of development within 800metres of bus and rail services will provide for their potential use as alternative transport modes with significant social benefits for accessibility to major centres, services, facilities, jobs, plus personal satisfaction with the quality of neighbourhoods.

Appendix Page 158

74

10) Public transport access (Continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term









+ + + The vitality and viability of town centres and other employment locations can only benefit from the availability of public transport within easy walking distance.







Business start ups












+ + + The availability of public transport within easy walking distance of both jobs and housing areas will benefit the viability of employment locations and their accessibility. Reduced journey times can result from the provision of bus lanes and bus rapid transit which become more viable propositions in relation to larger scales of growth..

Appendix Page 159

75


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + The availability of public transport within easy walking distance of both jobs and housing areas will benefit the viability of employment locations and their accessibility while assisting rural diversification and providing employment in its own right.

Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives Economic benefits will result from the availability of public transport within easy walking distance of both jobs and housing areas due to their improved accessibility. Reduced journey times can result from the provision of bus lanes and bus rapid transit which become more viable propositions in relation to larger scales of growth..


Overall Conclusions: The availability of public transport within easy walking distance of both jobs and housing areas has the significant environmental, social and economic benefits of potentially reduced traffic and consequential adverse environmental impacts, improved accessibility to jobs, services and facilities, improved satisfaction with localities and benefits for the viability of town centres, employment locations and rural diversification.

Appendix Page 160

76


11) Utilities Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term



















+ + + The availability of adequate surface water drainage capacity is a significant contributor to the prevention of localised flooding.










Appendix Page 161

77

11) Utilities Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 162

78

11) Utilities (Continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






0










++ ++ ++ The availability of adequate sewage treatment and surface water drainage capacities are essential to prevent the risks of flooding and adverse impacts on groundwater resources and water bodies of ecological value. Adequate water supplies are a basic requirement of development and the appropriate location of development sites provides for the viable supply of water.










Adequate sewage treatment and surface water drainage capacities provide the environmental benefits of the prevention of flooding and adverse impacts on groundwater resources and water bodies of ecological value. Adequate water supplies are a basic requirement of development and the appropriate location of development sites provides for its viable supply. Utilities provision thus meets the requirements of objectives ENV 2 and ENV 8.

Appendix Page 163

79


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term








++ ++ ++ The provisions of adequate sewerage, drainage, water supply, electricity and (if available) gas supplies, are significant factors contributing towards the provision of high quality housing.


















Appendix Page 164

80


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 165

81


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












++ ++ ++ The provisions of adequate sewerage, drainage, water supply, electricity and (if available) gas supplies, significantly benefit residents’ satisfaction with their neighbourhoods.


The provisions of adequate sewerage, drainage, water supply, electricity and (if available) gas supplies are significant factors contributing towards the provision of high quality housing (objective S1) and significantly benefit residents’ satisfaction with their neighbourhoods (objective S8).

Appendix Page 166

82

11) Utilities (Continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term
















Business start ups

++ ++ ++ The provisions of adequate sewerage, drainage, water supply, electricity and (if available) gas supplies, significantly benefit potential locations for businesses and their development..











+ + + The provisions of adequate sewerage, drainage, water supply, electricity and (if available) gas supplies, significantly benefit potential locations for businesses and their development.

Appendix Page 167

83


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term













Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives The provisions of adequate utilities significantly benefit potential locations for businesses and their development thus meeting objectives EC 2 and EC 3.


Overall Conclusions: The provisions of adequate utilities has significant environmental benefits for flooding, groundwater preservation and water supplies in accordance with objectives ENV 2 and ENV 8, social benefits for the provision of high quality housing and residents’ satisfaction with their localities in accordance with objectives S1 and S8, and significant benefits for potential locations for businesses and their development thus meeting objectives EC 2 and EC 3.

Appendix Page 168

84


12) Services Accessibility Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term









0 0 0 No direct significant effect.



















++ ++ ++ The location of potential development sites within easy walking distance of important core services and facilities promotes a sequential approach to site location where most services are centrally located within a settlement while providing the potential for the use of non-car modes of transport with benefits for reduced emissions.

Appendix Page 169

85

12) Services Accessibility (Continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term







++ ++ ++ The location of development sites within easy walking distance of important core services and facilities reduces the need for travel and provides for the potential use of non-car modes of transport with the benefits of reduced traffic and traffic emissions.

















Appendix Page 170

86


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






0




















The availability of services within easy walking and cycling distance reduces the need to travel, traffic and its adverse environmental impacts in line with objectives ENV3 and ENV4.

Appendix Page 171

87


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term

















++ ++ ++ The location of new development sites within easy walking distance of important core services and facilities reduces the need for travel, provides for the potential use of non-car modes of transport, reduces potential social exclusion and deprivation while offering opportunities for increased social cohesion through shared activities.








0 0 0 No direct overall effect. However note that employment accessibility is covered by objective S4.

Appendix Page 172

88


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term







++ ++ ++ The location of new development sites within easy walking distance of important core services and facilities including employment locations has major long term benefits for their accessibility by non-car transport modes.









+ + + The location of new development sites within easy walking distance of important core services and facilities including education facilities provides an appropriate context for improved personal educational and training attainments and their consequential benefits.








+ + + The location of new development sites within easy walking distance of important core services and facilities including health facilities will help people to make informed choices about their state of health. Healthy lifestyles are a personal choice aided by the potential to walk and cycle to services and facilities and being able to gain access to recreational facilities provided as part of green infrastructure.

Appendix Page 173

89


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term








+ + + The location of new development sites within easy walking distance of important core services and facilities should provide for increased engagement in community activities and the development of local community identity.




++ ++ ++ The location of new development sites within easy walking distance of important core services and facilities should increase personal satisfaction with the locality.


Easy walking and cycling access to jobs and services greatly increases their accessibility and potential use with benefits for reduced social exclusion, increased community interaction and attainment and overall satisfaction with a locality in accordance with objectives S2 and S4-S8.

Appendix Page 174

90

12) Services Accessibility (Continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term









+ + + The location of new development within easy walking and cycling distances of jobs and services will support economic growth and the vitality and viability of town centres.







Business start ups












++ ++ ++ The location of new development within easy walking and cycling distances of jobs and services will support economic growth and reduce the length of the journey-to-work.

Appendix Page 175

91


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + The location of new development within easy access of jobs and services will support economic growth and minimise the length of the journey-to-work. Benefits in rural areas may be reduced however due to relatively low growth provisions in the villages and fewer public transport services.

Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives The main benefits of this criteria are to support economic growth, the vitality and viability of town centres and other businesses, rural employment opportunities and to reduce the journey to work..


Overall Conclusions: The application of this criterion has the significant environmental, social and economic benefits of reducing the need to travel , traffic and its environmental impacts; reduced social exclusion allied to improved social cohesion, community identity and satisfaction with growth locations; and support for economic growth and the vitality and viability of town centres.

Appendix Page 176

92


13) Other material considerations Sustainability Appraisal






FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





























Appendix Page 177

93

13) Other material considerations (Continued) Sustainability Appraisal

Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term















+ + + The noting of material considerations such as the impacts of sewage treatment works safeguarding areas have benefits for air quality and the ambiance of new development localities.










Appendix Page 178

94


Objectives








Short term

Medium

term

Long term






+

+ + The consideration of the impacts of on site minerals availability and the location of minerals safeguarding sites can reduce the need for minerals extraction on agricultural land with its impacts on soil resources.



















The main benefits are for air quality by avoiding sewage treatment works “cordon sanitaires” , and a reduced requirement for minerals extraction on agricultural land as a result of requiring the extraction of minerals on potential development sites (i.e. the benefits arising from the potential development of brownfield sites). (ENV6 and ENV7).

Appendix Page 179

95


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium term

Long term








+ + + The provision of housing sites will rely on their deliverability, a significant material consideration requiring their landowner support. While the quality of housing stock and housing schemes will result from detailed design considerations, these will rely on site-related considerations including the presence of oil and gas pipelines and sewage treatment works safeguarding areas. These will have an impact on development site capacities and their potential layouts..


















Appendix Page 180

96


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term

























Appendix Page 181

97


Objectives







SOCIAL FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + Residents’ satisfaction will be enhanced by the confirmation by land owners of their suggested development sites viability with regard to the provision of development–related requirements. Residents’ satisfaction will also benefit from the avoidance of sites within sewage treatment works safeguarding areas.


The main social benefits arise from the delivery of well designed housing developments ensured by land owner support (especially when accounting for the costs of development-related requirements), plus residents’ satisfaction with well designed schemes which would benefit most from unconstrained sites. (S1 and S8).

Appendix Page 182

98

13) Other material considerations (Continued)








ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term









+ + + The provision of employment and town centre commercial development sites will rely on their deliverability, a significant material consideration requiring their landowner support. While the quality of such new schemes will result from detailed design considerations, these will rely on site-related considerations including the presence of oil and gas pipelines and sewage treatment works safeguarding areas.







Business start ups

+ + + The provision of employment sites will rely on their deliverability, a significant material consideration requiring their landowner support. While the quality of new employment schemes will result from detailed design considerations, these will rely on site-related considerations including the presence of oil and gas pipelines and sewage treatment works safeguarding areas. These will have an impact on development site capacities and potential layouts..












Appendix Page 183

99


Objectives







ECONOMIC FACTORS

Short term

Medium

term

Long term












+ + + The provision of employment sites will rely on their deliverability, a significant material consideration requiring their landowner support. While the quality of new employment schemes will result from detailed design considerations, these will rely on site-related considerations including the presence of oil and gas pipelines and sewage treatment works safeguarding areas. These will have an impact on development site capacities and potential layouts..

Summary: SA vs. Economic Objectives The consideration of material considerations meets the economic objectives of supporting economic growth through the deliverability of sites based on their land owner support, and the consideration of elements that could have adverse impacts on design and layout including the presence of oil and gas pipelines and sewage treatment works safeguarding areas. (EC1, EC2 and EC5).


Overall Conclusions: The consideration of material considerations has the environmental benefits of ensuring improved air quality while reducing the need for mineral extraction on agricultural land (ENV5 and ENV7); the social benefits of satisfaction with the delivery of well designed layouts relatively unaffected by site constraints (S1 and S8), and the economic benefits of economic growth through the similarly based deliverability of employment sites (EC1-EC3).

Appendix Page 184

Appendix Page 185

Site ID

number

Assessed

as

Settlement Parish Site address

Size

of Site

(ha)

suggested

land use

Suggested by

(Surname)

NPA

or

RPA

Site conforms

with JCS

settlement

hierarchy for

consideration

of housing

allocation Se

ttle

me

nt B

ou

nd

ary

Exis

tin

g L

an

d U

se

Allo

ca

tio

n

Pri

ma

ry S

ho

pp

ing

Are

a

Ce

ntr

al b

usin

ess a

rea

Are

a o

f O

pe

n L

an

d E

NV

2

Riv

er

Va

lley E

NV

3N

orw

ich

So

uth

ern

Byp

ass

La

nd

sca

pe

Pro

tectio

n Z

on

e

EN

V6

Pro

tectio

n Im

po

rta

nt S

pa

ce

s

(IM

P3

)

Pro

tecte

d R

ail

Ro

ute

Bro

wn

fie

ld/G

ree

nfie

ld

Ag

ricu

ltu

ral L

an

d G

rad

e 1

, 2

His

tori

c P

ark

/Ga

rde

n

Lis

ted

Bu

ildin

g

Co

nse

rva

tio

n A

rea

Sch

ed

ule

d A

ncie

nt M

on

um

en

t

Site

Arc

ha

eo

log

ica

l In

tere

st

(HE

R)

Exis

tin

g U

se

Tre

e P

rese

rva

tio

n O

rde

r

An

cie

nt W

oo

dla

nd

Pro

tecte

d H

ed

ge

row

SS

SI/R

am

sa

r

Co

un

ty W

ildlif

e S

ite

SA

C/S

PA

Site

co

nta

min

atio

n/p

ollu

tio

n

Flo

od

Ris

k

Ha

za

rdo

us Z

on

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

Acce

ss issu

es

Se

rvic

e A

va

ilab

ility

(U

tilit

ies)

Lo

ca

l A

cce

ss to

Se

rvic

es

Site

Ava

ilab

ility

Ga

s P

ipe

line

Oil

Pip

elin

e

Site

s o

n a

Min

era

ls R

eso

urc

e

Min

era

l/W

aste

Sa

feg

ua

rdin

g s

ite

Se

wa

ge

tre

atm

en

t w

ork

s

sa

feg

ua

rdin

g

Art

icle

4 D

ire

ctio

n

NC

C T

ran

sp

ort

Vie

w

Co

nclu

sio

n

Comments Am

en

dm

en

ts to

Pre

ferr

ed

Op

tio

ns

Exp

lan

atio

n o

f A

me

nd

me

nt to

Pre

ferr

ed

Op

tio

ns

Re

gu

latio

n 1

9 O

utc

om

e a

nd

Po

licy N

um

be

r

1188

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Long Stratton

Mill 1.36

Housing/

Employment Leeder NPA Yes r g g g g g g g a g g r g g g a g g g g g g a g g r a r g g g g g a g

Listed mill tower in southern portion

of site in prominent position from

main access to site. Gas pipeline

600m to east. Removed from main

settlement.

Site rejected for

reasons referred to at

Preferred Options

stage

0107

Long

Stratton Tharston

off Flowerpot

Lane next to

Industrial

Estate 1.76 Housing Watts NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g g a g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Paddock well screened with

hedgerows. TPO on adjoining land

to south east and on opposite side of

Chequers Road. Withdrawn

application for business park

(2005/2413). Anglian Water score

as Red due to Foul Sewerage

Network capacity. Sewers cross

site. Could be considered as an

extension to adjacent employment

site but more distant from services

than other sites if being considered

for residential development (900m to

high school, 700m to nearest shops,

300m to bus service, just over 1km

to doctors surgery)

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

0146

Long

Stratton Tharston Picton Road 0.37 Housing Smith NPA Yes r g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Site is removed from main

settlement and although adjacent to

some existing development is not in

a location that new development is

to be focused due to access to

services. Listed Building at Hill

Farm on opposite side of Forncett

Road, though development of this

site unlikely to have an impact on its

setting. Refused applications for a

single dwelling in 1980s. Anglian

Water score as Red due to Foul

Sewerage Network capacity. Over

800m to all core services other than

bus service.

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

0189

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton St Mary's Road 1.99 Housing Lusty NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Relatively remote from services

(650m from recreation facilities,

550m to nearest shops (inc

convenience store), schools just

over 800m, doctors surgery over

800m) compared to other sites.

Although development of this site in

itself would be relatively intrusive,

development with 238 (and

potentially a larger 504) would

protrude more into open

countryside. Without a larger site

504, all access would need to be

through St Mary's Road.

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

0198

Long

Stratton Tharston

Chequers

Road 4.44 Housing SNC NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g a g g g g a g g g g g g g g g a g g g g a a a g

Planning application for 120

dwellings (2010/2225), with

committee resolution to approve.

Listed The Poplars adjacent to south-

west corner. TPO'd trees on

southern boundary of site. Anglian


Sewerage Network capacity. Water

mains cross site. Mineral policy

required. Doctors surgery approx

200m, primary school approx 300m,

employment opportunities within

500m, bus service within 600m,

shop approx 800m

Site has been

granted planning

permission since

the preferred option

consultation but will

not be counted

towards the 1,800

dwellings.

0238

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton St Mary's Road 1.62 Housing Lusty NPA Yes a g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Same issues with services as site

189 but with around an additional

100m. Development of site

dependent on site 189 - see

conclusions for that site.

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

0319

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Off St

Michael's Road 19.5 Mixed Use Smith NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g g g g g g g g g g a g g g g a a a g

Anglian Water score Red due to

Cordon Sanitaire. Water Mains and

Foul Sewer cross site. Mineral policy

required. Adjacent to employment

opportunities and doctors surgery

and primary school on opposite side

of road. If access via St Michaels Rd

can be achieved then 320m to bus

and 435m to shop.

Following the

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided

to allocated this site &

site (951c & 729) for

housing (up to 600

dwellings) and

employment

(approximately 1.5

ha) (indicative

location)

development. LSAAP

Policy numbers (LS1,

LS2).

Landscape/Townscape/ Ecology/Biodiversity Other Material ConsiderationsLocation Principles Existing Land Use Policy Undevelope

Appendix 6 - Site Assessment Table

Appendix Page 186

Site ID

number

Assessed

as


Size

of Site

(ha)

suggested

land use

Suggested by

(Surname)

NPA

or

RPA

Site conforms

with JCS

settlement

hierarchy for

consideration

of housing

allocation Se

ttle

me

nt B

ou

nd

ary

Exis

tin

g L

an

d U

se

Allo

ca

tio

n

Pri

ma

ry S

ho

pp

ing

Are

a

Ce

ntr

al b

usin

ess a

rea

Are

a o

f O

pe

n L

an

d E

NV

2

Riv

er

Va

lley E

NV

3N

orw

ich

So

uth

ern

Byp

ass

La

nd

sca

pe

Pro

tectio

n Z

on

e

EN

V6

Pro

tectio

n Im

po

rta

nt S

pa

ce

s

(IM

P3

)

Pro

tecte

d R

ail

Ro

ute

Bro

wn

fie

ld/G

ree

nfie

ld

Ag

ricu

ltu

ral L

an

d G

rad

e 1

, 2

His

tori

c P

ark

/Ga

rde

n

Lis

ted

Bu

ildin

g

Co

nse

rva

tio

n A

rea

Sch

ed

ule

d A

ncie

nt M

on

um

en

t

Site

Arc

ha

eo

log

ica

l In

tere

st

(HE

R)

Exis

tin

g U

se

Tre

e P

rese

rva

tio

n O

rde

r

An

cie

nt W

oo

dla

nd

Pro

tecte

d H

ed

ge

row

SS

SI/R

am

sa

r

Co

un

ty W

ildlif

e S

ite

SA

C/S

PA

Site

co

nta

min

atio

n/p

ollu

tio

n

Flo

od

Ris

k

Ha

za

rdo

us Z

on

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

Acce

ss issu

es

Se

rvic

e A

va

ilab

ility

(U

tilit

ies)

Lo

ca

l A

cce

ss to

Se

rvic

es

Site

Ava

ilab

ility

Ga

s P

ipe

line

Oil

Pip

elin

e

Site

s o

n a

Min

era

ls R

eso

urc

e

Min

era

l/W

aste

Sa

feg

ua

rdin

g s

ite

Se

wa

ge

tre

atm

en

t w

ork

s

sa

feg

ua

rdin

g

Art

icle

4 D

ire

ctio

n

NC

C T

ran

sp

ort

Vie

w

Co

nclu

sio

n

Comments Am

en

dm

en

ts to

Pre

ferr

ed

Op

tio

ns

Exp

lan

atio

n o

f A

me

nd

me

nt to

Pre

ferr

ed

Op

tio

ns

Re

gu

latio

n 1

9 O

utc

om

e a

nd

Po

licy N

um

be

r

0365

Long

Stratton Tharston

Land at

Chequers

Farm 0.69 Housing Birch NPA Yes a g g g g g g g a g g a g g g a g g a g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Paddock on stretch of Chequers

Road which currently has a semi-

rural character with a sporadic

pattern of development including

some listed properties such as The

Meadows opposite the site, although

the development of site 198 may

alter this to some extent. However,

even with development of site 198

this site will remain slightly detached

from the main built-up area and

incongruent in the local area.

Remote from services compared to

other sites, although employment

opportunities and recreation facilities

are approx 500m. Anglian Water

score as Red due to Foul Sewerage

Network capacity.

Site rejected for

reasons referred to

at Preferred

Options stage

0504

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

land south

Flowerpot Lane 2.71 Housing Alexander NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a a g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Site proposed is only part of field

and would only realistically make

sense to develop whole field as part

of a larger scheme, potentially with

sites 238 and 189. However, this

area is more remote from services

compared to other sites and does

not offer the same potential to

deliver the requirements of the JCS.

TPO'd woodland at north-western

corner of site. Employment

opportunities close by, shop approx

700m, nursery school within 800m

bur primary and high school over

800m

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

0542

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

land adj.

Churchfields

Road 8.5 Housing Hyde NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g g a g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g

Site to be considered as part of

larger site R0983b which has the

potential to deliver key requirements

of the JCS such as the by-pass.


Foul Sewerage Network Capacity.

Range of shops and employment

opportunities including supermarket

within 400m for pedestrians and

cyclists via Star Lane, bus service

300m approx, school approx 800m

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided

to allocate this site for

housing development

(including sites

RO983a, RO983b,

0719, RO443) for

approximately 1200

dwellings. LSAAP

Policy number (LS1).

0719

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

land at Hall

Lane 0.74 Housing Smith NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g a a g g a g g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Backland site currently with narrow

access from Ipswich Road. Access

could also be achieved from Hall

Lane by redeveloping Two Hooks

which is within the suggested site or

through site R0983b. Grade I listed

church immediately to west of site.

Sewers crossing site. Range of

shops and employment

opportunities and bus service within

200m. School more than 800m.

Following the

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided


housing development

(including sites

RO983a, RO983b,

0542, RO443) for

approximately 1200

dwellings. LSAAP


0729

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

land at The

Red House,

Norwich Road 0.22 Housing Sapey NPA Yes a g g g g g g g a g g a g g g a g g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

The Red House is Grade II listed of

which the site forms part of the

curtilage of. Inclusion of this site

within the development boundary

would only be appropriate if Site

951c was to be taken forward as a

site for development. Scores red on


Bus service only core service within

800m.

Following the

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided

to allocate this site

(and sites 951c, 319)

for housing (up to 600

dwellings). LSAAP

Policy numbers (LS1).

0951a

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land north of

Long Stratton

east of A140

Stratton 66.84 Housing

Sargent &

Cedars Farm

Settlement NPA Yes a g g g g g g g a g g a g g a a g g a g g g g g g g a a g g g a a a g

The Cedars on western edge of site

is Grade II listed, plus cottages in

south western corner. Adjacent to

SNLP River Valley (on opposite side

of B1527). Anglian Water score as

Red due to Foul Sewerage Network

Capacity. Water mains cross site.

Minerals policy required. Bus

service only core service within

800m.

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage


Appendix Page 187

Site ID

number

Assessed

as


Size

of Site

(ha)

suggested

land use

Suggested by

(Surname)

NPA

or

RPA

Site conforms

with JCS

settlement

hierarchy for

consideration

of housing

allocation Se

ttle

me

nt B

ou

nd

ary

Exis

tin

g L

an

d U

se

Allo

ca

tio

n

Pri

ma

ry S

ho

pp

ing

Are

a

Ce

ntr

al b

usin

ess a

rea

Are

a o

f O

pe

n L

an

d E

NV

2

Riv

er

Va

lley E

NV

3N

orw

ich

So

uth

ern

Byp

ass

La

nd

sca

pe

Pro

tectio

n Z

on

e

EN

V6

Pro

tectio

n Im

po

rta

nt S

pa

ce

s

(IM

P3

)

Pro

tecte

d R

ail

Ro

ute

Bro

wn

fie

ld/G

ree

nfie

ld

Ag

ricu

ltu

ral L

an

d G

rad

e 1

, 2

His

tori

c P

ark

/Ga

rde

n

Lis

ted

Bu

ildin

g

Co

nse

rva

tio

n A

rea

Sch

ed

ule

d A

ncie

nt M

on

um

en

t

Site

Arc

ha

eo

log

ica

l In

tere

st

(HE

R)

Exis

tin

g U

se

Tre

e P

rese

rva

tio

n O

rde

r

An

cie

nt W

oo

dla

nd

Pro

tecte

d H

ed

ge

row

SS

SI/R

am

sa

r

Co

un

ty W

ildlif

e S

ite

SA

C/S

PA

Site

co

nta

min

atio

n/p

ollu

tio

n

Flo

od

Ris

k

Ha

za

rdo

us Z

on

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

Acce

ss issu

es

Se

rvic

e A

va

ilab

ility

(U

tilit

ies)

Lo

ca

l A

cce

ss to

Se

rvic

es

Site

Ava

ilab

ility

Ga

s P

ipe

line

Oil

Pip

elin

e

Site

s o

n a

Min

era

ls R

eso

urc

e

Min

era

l/W

aste

Sa

feg

ua

rdin

g s

ite

Se

wa

ge

tre

atm

en

t w

ork

s

sa

feg

ua

rdin

g

Art

icle

4 D

ire

ctio

n

NC

C T

ran

sp

ort

Vie

w

Co

nclu

sio

n

Comments Am

en

dm

en

ts to

Pre

ferr

ed

Op

tio

ns

Exp

lan

atio

n o

f A

me

nd

me

nt to

Pre

ferr

ed

Op

tio

ns

Re

gu

latio

n 1

9 O

utc

om

e a

nd

Po

licy N

um

be

r

0951b

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land north of

Long Stratton

west of A140


Sargent &

Cedars Farm

Settlement NPA Yes a g g g g g g g a g g a g g a a g g a g g g g g g g a a g g g a a a g

The Cedars on opposite side of

A140 is Grade II listed. Adjacent to

SNLP River Valley (on opposite side

of Bungay Road). Anglian Water

score as Red due to Foul Sewerage

Network Capacity. Water mains

crossing site. Minerals policy

required. Bus service only core

service within 800m.

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

0951c

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land north of

Long Stratton

west of A140


Sargent &

Cedars Farm

Settlement NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g a g g a a g g a g g g g g g g a a g g g a a a g

Detached from main settlement and

therefore services (bus service only

core service within 800m) - would

only be appropriate to be taken

forward if part of a larger site with

sites 319 and R0983d to provide a

large part of the development

allocated for Long Stratton. Grade II

listed buildings on east of site on

A140. Anglian Water score as Red

due to Cordon Sanitaire. Water

mains crossing site. Mineral policy

required.

Following the

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided

to allocated this site &

site (0319) to

contribute to housing

(up to 600 dwellings )

and employment

(approximately 1.5

ha) (indicative

location)

development. LSAAP


LS2).

1084

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Mix-a-Man

Cement Works

Site, Ipswich

Road 1.72 Housing Ward NPA Yes r g g g g g g g g g g a g g a a g g g g g g a g g g a a g g g g g a g

Grade II listed The Cottage between

site and the A140. Would only be

practical to develop as a residential

development with larger

development including R0983c

given existing detached nature from

main settlement and distance from

services (bus service and

employment opportunities only core

services within 800m). Water mains

crossing site.

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

1085

Long

Stratton Tharston

Land adj.

Industrial

Estate,

Chequers

Road 3.95

Housing/

Commercial Hardesty NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Flat open field with no strong

boundary features either with

Chequers Road or open landscape

to west. No recent relevant planning

history. Water mains crossing site.

Adjacent employment site, however

further to other services (High

school approx 800m, surgery approx

750m) than other sites being

considered for residential

development.

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

A0020

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land adj. Plant

Depot, Ipswich

Road 4.15 Employment Unknown NPA

Existing

employment

allocation -

check

deliverability g g g g g g g g a g g g g g a a g g a g g g a a g g a a a g g g g a g

Planning permission (implemented)

for c/u of plant depot to scaffolding

business depot. Remainder of site

remains in agricultural use. SFRA

shows area of Zone 2 Flood Risk.



pproximately 6 ha of

employment land

allocation through the

South Norfolk Local

Plan (2003). This

land has not come

forward to date. Site

allocated for

approximately 8 ha of

employment land

(LS2)

R0443

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land at The

Parsonage,

Norwich Road 0.50 Peecock NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g a g g g g g g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Historically land associated with The

Old Parsonage, access would now

need to be through Churchfields

estate. Resolution to grant

permission (2011/1916) for 11

affordable housing units. School

over 1km.

Following the

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided


housing development

which will contribute

to the approximate

1200. LSAAP Policy

number (LS1).


Appendix Page 188

Site ID

number

Assessed

as


Size

of Site

(ha)

suggested

land use

Suggested by

(Surname)

NPA

or

RPA

Site conforms

with JCS

settlement

hierarchy for

consideration

of housing

allocation Se

ttle

me

nt B

ou

nd

ary

Exis

tin

g L

an

d U

se

Allo

ca

tio

n

Pri

ma

ry S

ho

pp

ing

Are

a

Ce

ntr

al b

usin

ess a

rea

Are

a o

f O

pe

n L

an

d E

NV

2

Riv

er

Va

lley E

NV

3N

orw

ich

So

uth

ern

Byp

ass

La

nd

sca

pe

Pro

tectio

n Z

on

e

EN

V6

Pro

tectio

n Im

po

rta

nt S

pa

ce

s

(IM

P3

)

Pro

tecte

d R

ail

Ro

ute

Bro

wn

fie

ld/G

ree

nfie

ld

Ag

ricu

ltu

ral L

an

d G

rad

e 1

, 2

His

tori

c P

ark

/Ga

rde

n

Lis

ted

Bu

ildin

g

Co

nse

rva

tio

n A

rea

Sch

ed

ule

d A

ncie

nt M

on

um

en

t

Site

Arc

ha

eo

log

ica

l In

tere

st

(HE

R)

Exis

tin

g U

se

Tre

e P

rese

rva

tio

n O

rde

r

An

cie

nt W

oo

dla

nd

Pro

tecte

d H

ed

ge

row

SS

SI/R

am

sa

r

Co

un

ty W

ildlif

e S

ite

SA

C/S

PA

Site

co

nta

min

atio

n/p

ollu

tio

n

Flo

od

Ris

k

Ha

za

rdo

us Z

on

e

Pu

blic

Tra

nsp

ort

Acce

ss issu

es

Se

rvic

e A

va

ilab

ility

(U

tilit

ies)

Lo

ca

l A

cce

ss to

Se

rvic

es

Site

Ava

ilab

ility

Ga

s P

ipe

line

Oil

Pip

elin

e

Site

s o

n a

Min

era

ls R

eso

urc

e

Min

era

l/W

aste

Sa

feg

ua

rdin

g s

ite

Se

wa

ge

tre

atm

en

t w

ork

s

sa

feg

ua

rdin

g

Art

icle

4 D

ire

ctio

n

NC

C T

ran

sp

ort

Vie

w

Co

nclu

sio

n

Comments Am

en

dm

en

ts to

Pre

ferr

ed

Op

tio

ns

Exp

lan

atio

n o

f A

me

nd

me

nt to

Pre

ferr

ed

Op

tio

ns

Re

gu

latio

n 1

9 O

utc

om

e a

nd

Po

licy N

um

be

r

R0983a

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land

surrounding

Hawthorn Farm

& Lodge Farm 30.40 Mixed use Leeder NPA Yes a g g g g g g g a g g a g g a a g g a g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Detached from main settlement,

development of this site would only

be appropriate in conjunction with

R0983b to deliver Long Stratton By-

pass. Adjoining listed buildings at

Lodge Farm and Cherry Tree Farm,

and opposite side of A140 at The

Cottage and Wild Rose Farm.



Water Mains crossing site. Shops in

town centre just over 900m, schools

and doctors surgery over 1km.

Employment opportunities just to

north.

Following the

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided


housing development.

The site will

contribute to the

approximate 1200.

LSAAP Policy number

(LS1).

R0983b

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land east of

A140

residential

estate

107.7

1 Mixed use Leeder NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g a g g a a g g a g g g g a g g a g g g g g g a g

Listed buildings adjoin northern part

of site and could also impact on

listed buildings in centre of Long

Stratton. SFRA shows area of Zone

2 Flood Risk. Anglian Water score

as Red due to Foul Sewerage

Network Capacity. Pumping

stations, water mains and sewer on

site.

Following the

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided


housing and

employment

(indicative)

development. LSAAP


LS2)

R0983c

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land south-

west of A140

residential

estate 8.16 Mixed use Leeder NPA Yes a g g g g g g g a g g a g g a a g g a g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Detached from main settlement and

would only be feasible as a

residential development as part of a

larger southern extension to the built-

up area with R0983a. Bus service

and employment opportunities only

services within 800m. Potential

impact on listed buildings including

Lodge Farm House on opposite side

of A140 and The College. Anglian


Sewerage Network capacity. Water

mains and sewer cross site.

Site rejected for


Preferred Options

stage

R0983d

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land north-

west of A140

residential

estate 2.19 Mixed use Leeder NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g a g g g a g g g g g g g g g g a a g g g g g a g

Adjacent to existing residential

development on St Michaels Road

from where access is possible as

well as direct from the A140. Public

footpath on northern boundary.

Could de developed either as a

small northern extension to the built-

up area or as part of a larger

development with sites 319 and

951c. 600m to centre of Long

Stratton but over 800m to school

and doctors surgery. Listed

Orchardliegh opposite, could also

affect Pepyrs to the north. Anglian

Water score as Red due to Cordon

Sanitare. Water mains and sewer

cross site.

Following the

Preferred Options

consultation the

Council has decided


housing development

(contribute to the

approximate 600

dwellings). LSAAP


S0125

Long

Stratton Tharston

Flowerpot

Lane, North of

Industrial

Estate 3.38 Housing Unknown NPA

SHLAA-

check

deliverability

See 1085

S0133

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Land at Ipswich

Road 5.41 Housing Unknown NPA

SHLAA-

check

deliverability

See A0020

Z1268

Long

Stratton Tharston

Land to the

west of

Tharston

Industrial

Estate Employment

Easton/

Bennington NPA Yes g g g g g g g g a g g g g g g a g g g g g g g g g g g a g g g g g g g

Open land to rear of existing

industrial estate. Public footpath

passes through northern portion of

site.

Site allocated for 2.5

ha of employment

land. LSAAP Policy

number (LS3).

Z1269

Long

Stratton

Long

Stratton

Stratton Motor

Company

Town centre

uses Bennington NPA Yes g g g g g g g g g g g r a g g a g g g g g g a a g g a a g g g g g g g

Heydon House which is partly in site

is Grade II listed, however

redevelopment of rest of site offers

an opportunity for a significant

improvement to the setting of the

building. Most of site, including

entire frontage onto A140, falls

within conservation area. Small part

of site in Flood Risk Zone 2 on

SFRA. Surface sewers crossing

site.

The site has been

incorporated within an

amended town centre

boundary and could

be suitable for town

centres uses. LSAAP


23 0 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 23 0 0 25sites

asses

sed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

asses

sed

sites

asses

sed

sites

asses

sed

sites

asses

sed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

asses

sed

sites

asses

sed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

asses

sed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites

assess

ed

sites assessed


Appendix Page 189

Appendix 7 – Housing Growth Options

Option 1: 1,800 dwellings and bypass to the east of Long Stratton


Investigating Question or Decision Making Criteria

Assessing the impacts Nature of Effects and Overall Assessment:

(++ / + / 0 / - / - - / ?) Quantify where possible. Include justification, comments and recommendations e.g. for mitigation measures


Short term

Medium term

Long term

ENV1: To maintain and enhance biodiversity, geodiversity, species and habitat quality, and avoid habitat fragmentation

Decision-making criteria Indicator-based concerns

Will nature conservation sites of international, national and local value be adversely affected by development of the site? Will development of the site increase the number or diversity of sites of nature conservation interest? Does it seek opportunities to integrate biodiversity into the development? Will it adversely affect sites of geological interest? Will it contribute to achieving BAP targets and conserve/enhance species and habitat diversity?

Ability to enhance and protect SSSIs, County Wildlife Sites and river quality. Limiting detrimental change to areas designated for their intrinsic environmental value

- 0 0 The majority of the area is in agricultural use, however Wood Green County Wildlife Site is approximately 500 metres from the potential route of the bypass. There could be an impact from traffic noise, and during construction phase there could be disruption. There are comparatively few hedges to the east of the village, even where historic field patterns remain.

ENV2: To limit or reduce vulnerability to climate change, including minimising the risks from flooding


Will development of the site minimise the risk of flooding? Will it help reduce the vulnerability of agriculture to changes in weather patterns? Is it promoting sustainable use of flood zones by ensuring that development is appropriate to the Flood Zone & passes Sequential Test & exception Test & requirements of PPS25 Does it encourage habitat relocation or compensation? Does the proposal make use of SUDS?

Reducing the number of planning applications permitted in flood zones Reducing the vulnerability of planning applications permitted in flood zones

0 0 0 Majority of land in flood zone 1, small low-lying area identified in SFRA in flood zones 2 or 3. Developers would need to demonstrate they could resolve issues identified by SFRA. New development should maximise SUDS and must comply JCS Policy 3.

Appendix Page 190






(++ / + / 0 / - / - - / ?) Quantify where possible. Include justification, comments and recommendations eg. for mitigation measures


Short term

Medium term

Long term



Will it encourage efficient use of energy? Is it promoting a sequential approach to the pattern of development? Will it reduce the emissions of greenhouse gases, including from energy and traffic? Will it increase the use of renewable energy sources?

Improving the provision of renewable energy generating schemes Reducing carbon dioxide emissions across the district

0 0 0 Development adjacent to existing built-up area. New development must comply JCS Policy 3.

ENV4: To reduce the effect of traffic on the environment


Will it reduce traffic volume or congestion? Will it reduce the need to travel? Will it reduce the effect of HGV traffic on people and environment? Will it increase the % of journeys using non-car modes?


0 + + After delivery of bypass, HGV traffic will avoid town centre. Location is accessible to Long Stratton's services, which will be within walking distance for many.

ENV5: To improve air quality and minimise noise, vibration and light pollution


Will it reduce emissions of atmospheric pollution? Will it improve air quality? Can it improve the ambiance of local areas?

Minimising the instances of particulate, NO2 pollution Trying to avoid the need for Air Quality Management Areas

0 + + After delivery of bypass, HGV traffic will avoid town centre. There should be localised improvements to air quality and ambiance of town centre.

Appendix Page 191






(++ / + / 0 / - / - - / ?) Quantify where possible. Include justification, comments and recommendations e.g. for

mitigation measures ENVIRONMENTAL

FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term

ENV6: To maintain and enhance the distinctiveness and quality of landscapes, townscapes and the historic environment


Will it protect the quality of landscapes and townscapes, or mitigate the effects of inappropriate development? Will the site make a positive contribution to the local area, and enhance the character of local landscapes? Will it reduce the amount of derelict, degraded and under-used land? Will the District’s heritage be preserved and/or enhanced?

Listed buildings, scheduled ancient monuments and all other heritage assets considered ‘at risk’ Conservation Area Appraisals and management plans

- 0 0 Short-term disruption during construction phase, and localised loss of historic field patterns. However, most historically valuable areas of landscape are avoided, and townscape will be significantly improved.

ENV7: To minimise the loss of undeveloped land and conserve and improve the quality of soil resources


Will it avoid the use of productive agricultural land? Will it minimise the irreversible use of soil resources?


- - - Major growth in one location will necessitate loss of agricultural land as there are insufficient brownfield sites available to accommodate proposed levels of growth. However, use of prime agricultural land avoided.

Appendix Page 192








Short term

Medium term

Long term

ENV8: To improve water qualities and provide for sustainable sources of supply and sustainable use


Does it conserve ground water resources

Will it reduce water consumption? Will the supply of water be efficient in terms of the overall network? What is impact upon water quality? Will it improve ecological status of water bodies as required by WFD?



+ + + Anglian Water has indicated that (with improvements) Long Stratton can accommodate the level of growth proposed. To ensure sustainable water supply, developers must demonstrate how they would resolve any specific issues identified by Anglian Water. New development must comply with JCS Policy 3.

ENV9: To minimise the production of waste and increase recycling


Will it result in less waste being produced or requiring disposal? Will it facilitate better community recycling facilities? Will it minimise consumption of resources eg use local materials and sustainably sourced products?

Reducing the number of kilograms of household waste collected per head Increasing the % of waste that is recycled or composted


Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Major growth to the east of Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, although this is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by improvements in the built environment.

Appendix Page 193






(++ / + / 0 / - / - - / ?) Quantify where possible. Include justification, comments and recommendations eg. for

mitigation measures SOCIAL FACTORS Short

term Medium

term Long term

S1: To provide everybody with the opportunity to live in a decent, suitable and affordable home


Will it reduce homelessness? Will it reduce housing need and ensure housing provision addresses the needs of all? Will it increase the range and affordability and quality of housing stock for all social groups?

Affordable housing completions per year against overall housing completions Reducing the number of unfit private sector dwellings

++ ++ ++ Will provide much needed new housing and contribute towards the 5 year housing land supply across the NPA. JCS Policy 4 requires a mix of housing and a percentage of affordable housing.

S2: To reduce poverty, inequality and social exclusion


Will it reduce poverty and social exclusion in those areas most affected? Will it improve the level of activity available to young people in the District? Will it support the development of Social Cohesion? Will it help to reduce levels of deprivation?

% of the population living in the most deprived super output areas of the country Reducing the numbers of people unemployed

0 0 0 No direct significant effects as Long Stratton does not have any particular issues with deprivation, poverty or social exclusion.

S3: To offer opportunities for all sections of the population to have rewarding and satisfying employment


Will it reduce unemployment overall? Will it improve earnings? Will it improve access to employment and help to create a better housing-jobs balance?

% of the population of working age in employment Improving the level of average earnings


Appendix Page 194







SOCIAL FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term

S4: To improve accessibility to essential services, facilities and the workplace, particularly for those most in need


Will it improve accessibility to key local services eg health, education, leisure, open space, shops, community and religious facilities? Will it improve access to employment opportunities?

Improving the effectiveness of public transport to service public facilities Encouraging the use of non-car modes of transport

+ + + Putting all development in one location makes delivery of a new primary school easier and more widely accessible to new residents. Local employment opportunities are within walking distance of part of site.

S5: To improve the education and skills of the population overall


Will it improve qualifications and skills of young people? Will it improve access to schools/education facilities for communities? Will it encourage opportunities for vocational skills training and improve local links with the workplace? Will it encourage lifelong learning and training?

Improving the level of school exam performance Improving the vocational training amongst the working population


S6: To improve the health of the population overall


Will it improve life expectancy? Will it improve access to high quality health facilities? Will it encourage healthy lifestyles? How?

Ability to access GP services Improving the general life expectancy at birth


Appendix Page 195








Medium term

Long term

S7: To encourage local community identity and foster mixed communities with co-operative attitudes, helping to reduce anti-social activity


Will it reduce actual levels of crime? Fear of crime? Will it encourage engagement in community activities? Will it contribute towards creating mixed and balanced communities?

Levels of crime and the community's general fear of crime Ability to create mixed and participative communities eg though election turnout

0 0 0 No direct significant effects. Human behaviour and community composition are separate issues.

S8: To improve the quality of where people live



Residents' perception of the quality of their neighbourhoods as places to live


Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Major growth to the east of Long Stratton will bring positive social benefits through provision of much needed housing. Policies in the JCS seek to ensure that developers provide a mix of housing with a percentage of affordable housing. Concentrating growth in one location makes it easier to deliver services and facilities to support growth, i.e. a new primary school.

Appendix Page 196







ECONOMIC FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term

EC1: To encourage sustained economic growth


Will it strengthen the local economy and support emerging employment uses in the District (eg research, tourism)? Will it help retain existing businesses? Will it aid farming diversification? Will it increase the vitality and viability of town centres?

Reducing business premises vacancy rates More VAT registered businesses in the District

+ + + Concentrating growth in one area may help to provide additional local services, and large parts of the potential development area are well related to the town centre and existing businesses.

EC2: To encourage and accommodate both indigenous and inward investment promoting a positive image of the District


Will it provide for a variety of locations for businesses? Will it add to a ready supply of employment premises? Is it supporting targeted emerging employment types?

Assessing the availability of employment land across the District Business start-up rates




Will it encourage the development of local employment locations/jobs? Is it located so as to minimise the journey to work? Will it enhance a group of existing employment generating uses? Will it encourage mixed use or live/work? Will it reduce journey times between key employment/service areas?

Travel-to-work by mode data Reducing the reliance on accessing the workplace via private car

+ + + Well located in relation to job opportunities in Long Stratton, and public transport journey to work services into Norwich.

Appendix Page 197








Medium term

Long term

EC4: To improve the social and environmental performance of the economy


Will it offer the opportunity for more flexible working? Will it operate in a way that seeks to minimise impact on the environment?


EC5: To improve economic performance in rural areas


Will it encourage rural diversification? Will it offer sources of employment in rural areas? Will it improve electronic communication potential?



Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Major growth to the east of Long Stratton would support existing local businesses and concentrating growth in one location could potentially support provision of additional employment opportunities.

Key to effects score: ++ Major Positive, + Minor Positive, 0 Neutral Effect, - Minor Negative, -- Major Negative, ? Uncertain Effect

Overall Conclusions on Option:

Major growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, although this is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by improvements in the built environment and provision of much needed housing. Concentrating growth in one location makes it easier to deliver services and facilities to support growth, i.e. a new primary school and could potentially support provision of additional employment opportunities.

Appendix Page 198


Option 2: 1,200 dwellings and bypass to the east and 600 to the north-west of Long Stratton






Short term

Medium term

Long term





- 0 0 The majority of the eastern area is in agricultural use; however Wood Green County Wildlife Site is approximately 500 metres from the potential route of the bypass. There could be an impact from traffic noise, and during construction phase there could be disruption. There are comparatively few hedges to the east of the village, even where historic field patterns remain, and one hedge boundary running N-S through the site in the north-west.



Will development of the site minimise the risk of flooding? Will it help reduce the vulnerability of agriculture to changes in weather patterns? Is it promoting sustainable use of flood zones by ensuring that development is appropriate to the Flood Zone & passes Sequential Test & Exception Test & requirements of PPS25 Does it encourage habitat relocation or compensation? Does the proposal make use of SUDS?


0 0 0 Majority of land in flood zone 1, small low-lying area to the east identified in SFRA in flood zones 2 or 3. Developers would need to demonstrate they could resolve issues identified by SFRA. New development should maximise SUDS and must comply JCS Policy 3.

Appendix Page 199








Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Development adjacent to existing built-up area. Housing in the north-west is well related to high school, GP and employment locations. New development must comply JCS Policy 3.





++ ++ ++ Housing in north-west is well related to high school, GP and employment locations. After delivery of bypass, HGV traffic will avoid town centre. All locations are accessible to Long Stratton's services, which will be within walking distance for many.





0 + + Housing in north-west is well related to high school, GP and employment locations. After delivery of bypass, HGV traffic will avoid town centre. There should be localised improvements to air quality and ambiance of town centre.

Appendix Page 200








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





- 0 0 Short-term disruption during construction phase, and localised loss of historic field patterns to the east. Some additional loss of landscape to west. However, most historically valuable areas of landscape are avoided, and townscape will be significantly improved.





-- -- -- Major growth around Long Stratton will necessitate loss of agricultural land as there are insufficient brownfield sites available to accommodate proposed levels of growth. Directing growth to two locations will increase the loss of agricultural land. However, use of prime agricultural land avoided.

Appendix Page 201








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





Planning permissions granted contrary to Environment Agency water quality advice Water consumption per head







Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Major growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, and directing growth to multiple locations will increase this loss, although the land is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by improvements in the built environment.

Appendix Page 202








Medium term

Long term
















Appendix Page 203








term Medium

term Long term





++ ++ ++ Putting major levels of development in one location makes delivery of a new primary school easier and more widely accessible to new residents. Locating housing development in the north-west facilitates access to local employment opportunities, high school and GP, which are also located to the west of Long Stratton.











Appendix Page 204








Medium term

Long term











Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Major growth in Long Stratton will bring positive social benefits through provision of much needed housing. Policies in the JCS seek to ensure that developers provide a mix of housing with a percentage of affordable housing. Concentrating most growth in one location makes it easier to deliver services and facilities to support growth, i.e. a new primary school. However, the north-west of Long Stratton is a very sustainable location, well-related to key services.

Appendix Page 205








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Concentrating most growth to the east may help to provide additional local services, while additional housing in the north-west improves the overall relationship between new housing development and the town centre and existing businesses.










++ ++ ++ Very well located in relation to job opportunities in Long Stratton, and public transport journey to work services into Norwich.

Appendix Page 206








Medium term

Long term










Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Major growth in Long Stratton would support existing local businesses. Concentrating high levels of growth in one location could potentially support provision of additional employment opportunities, while locating housing to the north-west increases the potential for sustainable travel to work modes.



Major growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, and allocating two sites will increase this loss, although the land involved is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by improvements in the built environment and provision of much needed housing. Concentrating major growth in one location makes it easier to deliver services and facilities to support growth and could potentially support provision of additional employment opportunities. However, allocating land to the north-west will increase the potential use of sustainable travel modes, as this location is well-related to several key services.

Appendix Page 207


Option 3: 1,000 dwellings and bypass to the east, 600 to the north-west and 200 to the south-west of Long Stratton






Short term

Medium term

Long term





- 0 0 The majority of the eastern area is in agricultural use, however Wood Green County Wildlife Site is approximately 500 metres from the potential route of the bypass. There could be an impact from traffic noise, and during construction phase there could be disruption. There are comparatively few hedges to the east of the village, even where historic field patterns remain. There are a few hedge boundaries running through the sites in the west.






Appendix Page 208








Short term

Medium term

Long term









Will it reduce the need to travel? Will it reduce the effect of HGV traffic on people and environment? Will it increase the % of journeys using non-car modes?








Appendix Page 209








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





-- 0 0 Short-term disruption during construction phase, and localised loss of historic field patterns to the east. Additional loss of landscape to north-west and further impact to south-west. However, most historically valuable areas of landscape are avoided, and townscape will be significantly improved.





-- -- -- Major growth around Long Stratton will necessitate loss of agricultural land as there are insufficient brownfield sites available to accommodate proposed levels of growth. Directing growth to three locations will further increase the loss of agricultural land. However, use of prime agricultural land avoided.

Appendix Page 210








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term













Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Major growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, and directing growth to multiple locations will further increase this loss, although the land is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by improvements in the built environment.

Appendix Page 211








Medium term

Long term
















Appendix Page 212








term Medium

term Long term





+ + + The lower level of growth in the east in this option could limit the range of additional services deliverable. Locating housing development in the north-west facilitates access to local employment opportunities, high school and GP. Housing in the south-west would make employment site and high school accessible, and other services which are also located to the west of Long Stratton.






Appendix Page 213








Medium term

Long term
















Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Major growth in Long Stratton will bring positive social benefits through provision of much needed housing. Policies in the JCS seek to ensure that developers provide a mix of housing with a percentage of affordable housing. Reducing the level of development to the east may make it more difficult to deliver services and facilities to support growth, i.e. a new primary school. However, the north-west of Long Stratton is a very sustainable location, well-related to key services, and the south-west is also well related to employment provision.

Appendix Page 214








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Concentrating most growth to the east may help to provide additional local services, while additional housing in the west improves the overall relationship between new housing development and the town centre and existing businesses.











Appendix Page 215








Medium term

Long term










Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Major growth in Long Stratton would support existing local businesses. Locating this level of growth in one location could potentially support provision of additional employment opportunities, while locating housing to the west increases the potential for sustainable travel to work modes.



Major growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, and allocating three sites will increase this loss, although the land involved is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by improvements in the built environment and provision of much needed housing. There is a critical mass for major growth below which it is more difficult to deliver additional services and facilities. This option may affect the range of services that could be supported. However, allocating land to the west will increase the potential use of sustainable travel modes, as this location is well-related to several key services and existing employment opportunities.

Appendix Page 216


Option 4: 1,800 dwellings and bypass to the east plus 600 to the north-west of Long Stratton






Short term

Medium term

Long term





- 0 0 The majority of the eastern area is in agricultural use, however Wood Green County Wildlife Site is approximately 500 metres from the potential route of the bypass. There could be an impact from traffic noise, and during construction phase there could be disruption. There are comparatively few hedges to the east of the village, even where historic field patterns remain, and one hedge boundary running N-S through the site in the north-west.



Will development of the site minimise the risk of flooding? Will it help reduce the vulnerability of agriculture to changes in weather patterns? Is it promoting sustainable use of flood zones by ensuring that development is appropriate to the Flood Zone & passes Sequential Test & Exception Test & requirements of PPS25 Does it encourage habitat relocation or compensation? . Does the proposal make use of SUDS?



Appendix Page 217








Short term

Medium term

Long term
















Appendix Page 218








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





- 0 0 Short-term disruption during construction phase, and localised loss of historic field patterns to the east. Additional loss of landscape to north-west. However, most historically valuable areas of landscape are avoided, and townscape will be significantly improved.





-- -- -- Major growth around Long Stratton will necessitate loss of agricultural land as there are insufficient brownfield sites available to accommodate proposed levels of growth. Allocating housing in two locations will take up more agricultural land than option 1 and less than option 3. However, use of prime agricultural land avoided.

Appendix Page 219








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Major growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, the quantity lost depending largely on which option is selected, although the land is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by improvements in the built environment.

Appendix Page 220








Medium term

Long term
















Appendix Page 221








term Medium

term Long term





+ 0 + The higher level of growth in the east in this option, combined with significant growth in the north-west, could expand the range of additional services deliverable. Locating housing development in the north-west facilitates access to local employment opportunities, high school and GP, along with other services which are located to the west of Long Stratton. However, this combined level of growth could overwhelm local services in the mid-term.











Appendix Page 222








Medium term

Long term











Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Major growth in Long Stratton will bring positive social benefits through provision of much needed housing. Policies in the JCS seek to ensure that developers provide a mix of housing with a percentage of affordable housing. Allocating large developments in both east and west may make facilitate more services and facilities to support growth. This could produce a very sustainable development. However, the levels of growth could cumulatively overwhelm the existing services in the mid-term, although they could expand in the longer term.

Appendix Page 223








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Concentrating most growth to the east may help to provide additional local services, while additional housing in the west improves the overall relationship between new housing development and the town centre and existing businesses.











Appendix Page 224








Medium term

Long term










Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Major growth in Long Stratton would support existing local businesses. Locating this level of growth in two locations could potentially support provision of additional employment opportunities, while encouraging new service provision.



Major growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, and allocating two sites leads to lower loss than option 3 but higher loss than option 1, although the land involved is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by improvements in the built environment and provision of much needed housing. The allocation of two significant areas for residential development would support the delivery of additional services and facilities in sustainable locations. However, allocating such high levels of growth will increase the strain on local services in the mid-term, before these services had an opportunity to expand.

Appendix Page 225

Appendix 8 – Employment Growth Options

Option 1: Retain and expand existing A140 employment allocation to east of Long Stratton






Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 The existing allocation is within 1km of Wood Green CWS, and the potential route of the Long Stratton bypass runs between the two. The site is adjacent to the built up area and it is not envisaged that its development would have significant impact in this regard.





0 0 0 Site is in Flood Zone 1. No impacts anticipated.

Appendix Page 226








Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Site is well related to existing and proposed built-up area, facilitating sustainable travel to work choices. No negative impacts anticipated.





+ + + Site is well related to existing and proposed built-up area, facilitating sustainable travel to work choices. Development in conjunction with adjacent housing is anticipated to reduce the need for car-based travel.





0 0 0 Development close to housing will reduce the need for car-based travel. However (depending on eventual occupation) employment use is unlikely to improve ambience of the area.

Appendix Page 227








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Employment use is unlikely to make a positive contribution to the street scene. However, part of the site contains an existing employment use. With careful screening and appropriate layout, increasing the allocation here may not have significant negative impacts.





- - - Increasing the allocation of employment land will require land in agricultural use as there is little previously developed land available in Long Stratton.








Appendix Page 228








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Development of land for employment uses around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, although the land is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction, but these would be offset by the increase in job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich.






Appendix Page 229








Medium term

Long term










++ ++ ++ With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich.





++ ++ ++ With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. This site is very well related to one of the potential areas of housing growth, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.

Appendix Page 230








term Medium

term Long term
















Appendix Page 231








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Social Objectives With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. This site is very well related to one of the potential areas of housing growth, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.







Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ Allocating the site for employment uses would increase job opportunities in Long Stratton. There is an existing business operating on part of the site.

Appendix Page 232








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Expanding the job opportunities at this site would add to existing employment premises.





++ ++ ++ Development of this site for employment use will encourage job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. This site is very well related to one of the potential areas of housing growth, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.




? ? ? Operational effects cannot be known.

Appendix Page 233








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Development of this site for employment use will encourage job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. This site is very well related to one of the potential areas of housing growth, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.



Employment growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, although the land involved is not of premium quality. With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. This site is very well related to one of the potential areas of housing growth, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.

Appendix Page 234


Option 2: Retain existing A140 employment allocation with modest expansion, plus extension Tharston Industrial Estate






Short term

Medium term

Long term





- 0 0 The existing allocation is within 1km of Wood Green CWS, and the potential route of the Long Stratton bypass runs between the two. This site is adjacent to the built up area and it is not envisaged that its development would have significant impact in this regard. Extension of Tharston Industrial Estate would take up additional undeveloped land, and if extended to the north, would be approximately 500m from Hill Farm Woodland CWS. Development here may cause disruption during the construction phase and would need to mitigate any impact on the CWS.





0 0 0 Sites are in Flood Zone 1. No impacts anticipated.

Appendix Page 235








Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Sites are well related to existing and proposed built-up area, facilitating sustainable travel to work choices. No negative impacts anticipated.





+ + + Sites are well related to existing and proposed built-up areas, facilitating sustainable travel to work choices.





+ + + Development close to housing will reduce the need for car-based travel. Delivery of the bypass in the suggested route depends on relocation of existing employment uses to Tharston Industrial Estate. However (depending on eventual occupation) employment use is unlikely to improve ambience of the area.

Appendix Page 236








Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + Delivery of the bypass in the suggested route depends on relocation of existing employment uses to Tharston Industrial Estate. Employment use is unlikely to make a positive contribution to the street scene. However, both sites are adjacent to existing employment use. With careful screening and appropriate layout, increasing the area of both sites may not have significant negative impacts.





- - - Increasing the allocation of employment land at either location will require land in agricultural use as there is little previously developed land available in Long Stratton.

Appendix Page 237








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Development of land for employment uses around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, although the land is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction and in relation to the CWS at Hill Farm Woodland, but these would be offset by the increase in job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich.

Appendix Page 238








Medium term

Long term
















Appendix Page 239








term Medium

term Long term





++ ++ ++ With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. Both sites are very well related to either a potential area of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.











Appendix Page 240








Medium term

Long term











Summary: SA vs Social Objectives With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. Both sites are very well related to either potential areas of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.

Appendix Page 241








Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ Expanding both employment locations would increase job opportunities in Long Stratton. There are existing businesses operating on both sites.





+ + + Expanding the job opportunities at these sites would add to existing employment premises.





++ ++ ++ Development of these sites for employment use will encourage job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. The sites are very well related to either a potential area of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.

Appendix Page 242








Medium term

Long term










Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Development of these sites for employment use will encourage job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. The sites are very well related to either potential areas of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.



Employment growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, although the land involved is not of premium quality. Impact on CWS should be minimised and mitigated against. With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. Both sites are very well related to either potential areas of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.

Appendix Page 243


Option 3: Retain existing A140 employment allocation with modest expansion, extension Tharston Industrial Estate, plus employment allocation with

housing north-west of Long Stratton






Short term

Medium term

Long term





- 0 0 The existing allocation is within 1km of Wood Green CWS, but it is not envisaged that expansion would have significant impact in this regard. Extension of Tharston Industrial Estate, if extended to the north, would be approximately 500m from Hill Farm Woodland CWS. Development here may cause disruption during the construction phase and would need to mitigate any impact on the CWS. Including development for employment use as part of a mixed use scheme to the north-west would not have any additional significant environmental impacts.





0 0 0 Sites are in Flood Zone 1. No impacts anticipated.

Appendix Page 244


Option 3: Retain existing A140 employment allocation with modest expansion, extension Tharston Industrial Estate, plus employment allocation with housing north-west of Long Stratton






Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Sites are well related to existing and proposed built-up area, facilitating sustainable travel to work choices. No negative impacts anticipated.





++ ++ ++ Sites are well related to existing and proposed built-up areas, facilitating sustainable travel to work choices.





+ + + Development close to housing will reduce the need for car-based travel. Delivery of the bypass in the suggested route depends on relocation of existing employment uses to Tharston Industrial Estate. However (depending on eventual occupation) employment use is unlikely to improve ambience of the area.

Appendix Page 245









FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + Employment use is unlikely to make a positive contribution to the street scene. Delivery of the bypass in the suggested route depends on relocation of existing employment uses to Tharston Industrial Estate. All sites are adjacent to existing employment use. With careful screening and appropriate layout, employment uses at these sites may not have significant negative impacts.





- - - Increasing the allocation of employment land at all locations will require land in agricultural use as there is little previously developed land available in Long Stratton.

Appendix Page 246









FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Development of land for employment uses around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, although the land is not of premium quality. There would be environmental impacts, particularly during construction and in relation to the CWS at Hill Farm Woodland, but these would be offset by the increase in job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. Including employment uses in the north-west would not significantly increase the environmental impacts of developing this site for residential use.

Appendix Page 247









Medium term

Long term
















Appendix Page 248









Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. All sites are very well related to either a potential area of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.











Appendix Page 249









term Medium

term Long term











Summary: SA vs Social Objectives With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. All sites are very well related to either potential areas of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.

Appendix Page 250









Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ Expanding both employment locations and including employment as part of a mixed use development would increase job opportunities in Long Stratton. There are existing businesses operating at A140 and Tharston sites, and adjacent employment uses in the north-west.





+ + + Expanding the job opportunities at these sites would add to existing employment premises.





++ ++ ++ Development of these sites for employment use will encourage job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. The sites are very well related to either a potential area of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.

Appendix Page 251


Option 3: Retain existing A140 employment allocation with modest expansion, extension Tharston Industrial Estate, plus employment allocation with housing north-west of Long Stratton






Medium term

Long term










Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Development of these sites for employment use will encourage job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. The sites are very well related to either potential areas of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.



Employment growth around Long Stratton will involve loss of agricultural land, although the land involved is not of premium quality. Impact on CWS should be minimised and mitigated against. With the housing growth planned, it is essential to increase job opportunities in Long Stratton, reducing the need to travel to Norwich. All three sites are very well related to either potential areas of housing growth or existing residential areas, increasing the opportunity for sustainable transport choices.

Appendix Page 252

Appendix 9 SA of Other Policies

Policy Long Stratton Town Centre Policy: Defining a Town Centre






Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 The improvements arising from implementation of the town centre policy would not have any significant impact on such sites.

Appendix Page 253








Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 The town centre is in Flood Zone 1. Town centre improvements would not affect vulnerability to climate change.





+ + ++ Enhancing the self-containment of Long Stratton will encourage more local use of services, thereby reducing traffic emissions. These benefits are likely to increase over time as more businesses are formed to serve the needs of the new population.

Appendix Page 254








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + ++ Enhancing the self-containment of Long Stratton will encourage more local use of services, thereby reducing traffic emissions. These benefits are likely to increase over time as more businesses are formed to serve the needs of the new population.





++ ++ ++ The intention of the town centre policy is to improve the ambience of Long Stratton. Concentrating town centre uses will reduce residents' dependence on car transport.

Appendix Page 255








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ The intention of the town centre policy is to improve the ambience of Long Stratton. Implementation of the policy will improve the character of the town and enhance the existing built environment through reduction in vacant units and increase in more visible outdoor amenity.





++ ++ ++ Implementation of the policy will prevent greenfield development for town centre uses in many cases. The requirements for proposals of town centre uses on out-of-town centre sites will ensure that only exceptional proposals would be permitted.

Appendix Page 256








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term






0 0 0 No significant effects.






Appendix Page 257


Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Overall, the town centre policy has significant environmental benefits through direct improvements to the ambience of Long Stratton and to the eventual reduction in reliance on the car due to increase in the number and range of businesses located here.

Appendix Page 258








Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Although the potential for conversion to residential use is limited by this policy, the number of business addresses to which this applies is very small compared to the number of dwellings planned for Long Stratton.





+ + + Increasing the number of businesses in Long Stratton will support social cohesion through the improved opportunity to socialise in the town centre.



Will it reduce unemployment overall? Will it improve earnings?


Appendix Page 259



+ + + All town centre uses have an associated effect on local employment opportunities.







term Medium

term Long term





++ ++ ++ Implementation of the policy will result in more facilities available for local residents, as well as increased employment opportunities.



Will it improve qualifications and skills of young people? Will it improve access to schools/education facilities for communities?


Appendix Page 260


Will it encourage opportunities for vocational skills training and improve local links with the workplace? Will it encourage lifelong learning and training?

0 0 0 No significant effect.

Appendix Page 261








Medium term

Long term










+ + + Increasing the number of commercial enterprises will encourage social interaction in the town. Making more use of outside space will increase passive surveillance.

Appendix Page 262








Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ A more self-contained town is likely to be popular with local residents. Enhancement of the historic character of the town centre will also be popular.

Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Potential benefits of this policy include improved social cohesion and local employment opportunities as well as improved access to facilities.

Policy Long Stratton Town Centre Policy






Medium term

Long term



Will it strengthen the local economy and support emerging employment uses in the District (eg research,


Appendix Page 263


tourism)? Will it help retain existing businesses? Will it aid farming diversification? Will it increase the vitality and viability of town centres?

++ ++ ++ Protecting empty commercial units from other uses will support businesses seeking to locate in Long Stratton, increase the vitality of the town centre and thereby also support existing businesses. Enhancing the historic built environment is likely to have economic benefits.







Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ Existing commercial units will be protected, and there is potential for new land-intensive uses through sequential testing.





++ ++ ++ Improvement of the town centre will provide improved facilities for local residents and will serve new developments. The new employment opportunities will be accessible to local residents.

Appendix Page 264





+ + + The proximity of the town centre to residential areas provides for a range of employment opportunities and reduces the need to travel to Norwich.

Appendix Page 265








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives The economic benefits of this policy include improving local job opportunities, attracting inward investment and supporting existing local businesses.


Overall Conclusions on Policy

There are no significant negative impacts from implementing the town centre policy. Potential benefits include improved social cohesion through increased facilities for local residents, better access to local job opportunities and environmental benefits in the historic built environment.

Recommendations:

It is recommended to include a policy to define the town centre in the AAP because of the potential for positive environmental, social and economic benefits that this policy could have.

Appendix Page 266


Policy Environment: Preserving and enhancing the historic character of Long Stratton






Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No direct significant effect on nature conservation sites

Appendix Page 267








Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No direct significant effect on land in flood zones 2 or 3





+ + + Preserving and enhancing the distinctive character of the town centre is encouraging sequential development and has the potential to reduce traffic emissions by encouraging people to use Long Stratton centre for their shopping rather than travelling further afield

Appendix Page 268








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + Preserving and enhancing the distinctive character of the town has the potential to improve the vitality and viability and therefore encourage people to shop in Long Stratton rather than travelling further afield, thus reducing the need to travel and reducing traffic volume and congestion






Appendix Page 269








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ The purpose of this policy is to preserve, maintain and enhance the distinctiveness character of the town and local historic landscape.





0 0 0 No significant impacts

Appendix Page 270








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Appendix Page 271


Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Retaining and enhancing the distinctive character of the town centre has the potential to have some positive environmental effects, mainly on protecting the quality of the townscape and encouraging people to shop in Long Stratton rather than travelling further afield thus reducing traffic emissions

Appendix Page 272








Medium term

Long term















Appendix Page 273



0 0 0 All town centre uses have an associated effect on local employment opportunities.







term Medium

term Long term





0 0 0 Implementation of the policy will result in more facilities available for local residents, as well as increased employment opportunities.



Will it improve qualifications and skills of young people? Will it improve access to schools/education facilities for


Appendix Page 274


communities? Will it encourage opportunities for vocational skills training and improve local links with the workplace? Will it encourage lifelong learning and training?


Appendix Page 275








Medium term

Long term











Appendix Page 276








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Retaining and enhancing the distinctive character of the town will have mostly neutral social impacts

Appendix Page 277








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Retaining and enhancing the distinctive character of the town centre has the potential to increase the vitality and viability of the town and thus strengthen the local economy







Medium term

Long term






Appendix Page 278











Appendix Page 279








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Retaining and enhancing the distinctive character of the town would be likely to have mainly neutral economic impacts, other than the potential to improve vitality and viability and thus strengthen the local economy



A policy to preserve and enhance the distinctive character of the town would have some positive impacts such as reducing the effect of traffic and improving the quality of townscapes. It would have mainly neutral social impacts and some positive economic effects on the vitality and viability of the town centre and the strength of the local economy

Recommendation: It is recommended to include a policy in the AAP to retain and enhance the distinct character of the town because of the potential environmental and economic benefits it could have.

Appendix Page 280


Policy Environment: Provision of Green Infrastructure






Short term

Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ The purpose of the policy is to protect and enhance nature conservation sites and encourage habitat integration

Appendix Page 281








Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + The provision of GI can alleviate flood risk.





++ ++ ++

Appendix Page 282








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No significant effects





+ + + Protecting areas around the town from development has the potential to improve air quality and ambiance of the local area

Appendix Page 283








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





++ ++ ++ Protecting areas around the town from development will make a positive contribution to the local area by protecting the quality of the landscape and townscape.





++ ++ ++ Protecting areas around the town from development will help to protect productive agricultural land.

Appendix Page 284








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Appendix Page 285


Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives A policy to protect and provide GI around Long Stratton from development has the potential to have major positive environmental impacts, particularly protecting the quality of townscapes and landscapes as well as protecting productive greenfield land.

Appendix Page 286








Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No significant effetcs.





No significant effects.





Appendix Page 287










term Medium

term Long term










Appendix Page 288




Appendix Page 289








Medium term

Long term





+ + + The protection of open space and improved access to the countryside has the potential to encourage feelings of wellbeing and healthier lifestyles






Appendix Page 290








Medium term

Long term





+ + + The protection of open space and improved access to the countryside has the potential to encourage a feeling of well being and improve the satisfaction of people with where they live.

Summary: SA vs Social Objectives A policy t0 provide and protect important areas around the town would be likely to have mainly neutral social impacts other than on people’s ability to live healthier lifestyles and be more satisfied with where they live.

Appendix Page 291








Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No direct significant impacts.







Medium term

Long term






Appendix Page 292











Appendix Page 293








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives A Policy to provide and protect important areas around the town would be likely to have a neutral impact on economic objectives.



A Policy to protect areas around the town from development would have positive environmental impacts and fairly neutral social and economic benefits

Recommendations:

It is recommended to include a Landscape Policy in the AAP to protect important areas around the town from development because of the major positive environmental benefits it would bring.

Appendix Page 294


Policy Protecting existing open space






Short term

Medium term

Long term






Appendix Page 295








Short term

Medium term

Long term











Appendix Page 296








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + Protecting existing open space has the potential to reduce the effect of traffic on the environment by ensuring that people have access to recreation without having to travel to find facilities further afield





+ + + Protecting existing open space has the potential to make a positive contribution to the local area by improving the quality of the townscape

Appendix Page 297








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term











Appendix Page 298








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Appendix Page 299


Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives A policy to protect existing open space would have mainly neutral effects on environmental objectives although there is an opportunity to positively enhance townscapes and reduce the impact of traffic on the environment as people can access recreation in their own communities without having to travel further afield.

Appendix Page 300








Medium term

Long term















Appendix Page 301










term Medium

term Long term





++ ++ ++ Protecting existing open space has the potential to improve accessibility to leisure and open space.





Appendix Page 302




Appendix Page 303








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Protecting existing open space has the potential to encourage healthy lifestyles and thus improve life expectancy






Appendix Page 304








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Protecting existing open space has the potential to improve the satisfaction of people with where they live

Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Protecting existing open space has the potential for some positive impacts on social objectives particularly related to accessibility to leisure and recreation facilities, encouraging healthy lifestyles and peoples satisfaction with where they live.







Medium term

Long term





Appendix Page 305










Medium term

Long term











Appendix Page 306






Appendix Page 307








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives A policy to protect existing open space is unlikely to have any significant positive or negative economic effects



A policy to protect existing open space would have fairly neutral environmental and economic effects but has the potential to have positive social impacts relating to improving peoples satisfaction with where they live and encouraging healthier lifestyles

Recommendations:

It is recommended to include a policy to protect existing open space in the AAP because of the potential positive social impacts it would have

Appendix Page 308


Policy New open space provision and improving existing






Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No direct significant effects as the policy would not directly affect any nature conservation sites

Appendix Page 309








Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No direct significant effects of any land in flood zones 2 or 3






Appendix Page 310








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + Providing new open space and improving existing areas has the potential to reduce the effect of traffic on the environment by ensuring that people have access to recreation opportunities in the town without having to travel further afield






Appendix Page 311








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + Providing new open space and improving existing areas has the potential to make a positive contribution to the local area by improving the quality of the townscape






Appendix Page 312








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Appendix Page 313


Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives Providing new areas of open space protecting existing areas would have mainly neutral environmental effects other than potential positive effects on the quality of townscapes and reducing the need to travel by ensuring that people have access to recreational opportunities in the town without having to travel further afield.

Appendix Page 314








Medium term

Long term















Appendix Page 315










term Medium

term Long term





++ ++ ++ Providing new open space and improving existing areas has the potential to improve accessibility to leisure and open space for local people.





Appendix Page 316




Appendix Page 317








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Providing new open space and improving existing areas has the potential to encourage healthy lifestyles and this improve life expectancy.






Appendix Page 318








Medium term

Long term





+ + + Protecting existing open space has the potential to improve the satisfaction of people with where they live

Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Protecting existing open space has the potential for some positive impacts on social objectives particularly related to accessibility to leisure and recreation facilities, encouraging healthy lifestyles and peoples satisfaction with where they live.







Medium term

Long term





Appendix Page 319










Medium term

Long term











Appendix Page 320






Appendix Page 321








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Providing new open space and improving existing areas is unlikely to have any significant positive or negative economic effects.



A policy to provide new open space and improve existing areas would have fairly neutral environmental and economic effects but has the potential to have positive social impacts particularly related to improving accessibility to recreation, encouraging healthier lifestyles and improving peoples quality of life and satisfaction with where they live.

Recommendations:

It is recommended to include a policy to protect existing open space in the AAP because of the potential positive social impacts it would have.

Appendix Page 322


Policy New Burial Ground






Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Specific site not identified but unlikely to allow a site which would have a direct impact on any nature conservation sites.

Appendix Page 323








Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Specific site not identified but sites located in zone 2 or 3 flood risk are unlikely to be acceptable locations for a new burial ground






Appendix Page 324








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 A new burial location is chosen to be accessible by public transport then overall impact should be neutral






Appendix Page 325








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 Specific location is not known but unlikely to have any direct significant effects





0 0 0 Specific location not known but unlikely to have any direct significant effects

Appendix Page 326








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Appendix Page 327


Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives The specific site for the location of a new burial ground in Long Stratton has not yet been identified but the location will need to be carefully considered and therefore it is unlikely that there will be any significant environmental impacts.

Appendix Page 328








Medium term

Long term















Appendix Page 329










term Medium

term Long term










Appendix Page 330




Appendix Page 331








Medium term

Long term











Appendix Page 332








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Although a specific site for a new burial ground in Long Stratton has not yet been identified it would be unlikely to have any significant social impacts







Medium term

Long term





Appendix Page 333










Medium term

Long term











Appendix Page 334






Appendix Page 335








Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Although a specific site for a new burial ground in Long Stratton has not yet been identified it would be unlikely to have any significant economic impacts



Although a specific site has not been identified a policy to allow land to come forward for a new burial ground in Long Stratton would be likely to have fairly neutral environmental, social and economic effects

Recommendations:

It is recommended to include a policy in the AAP to allow land to come forward for a new burial ground due to the fact that this proposal would be unlikely to have any significant environmental, social or economic effects

Appendix Page 336


Policy Accessibility Policy






Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No significant impacts.






Appendix Page 337








Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + The policy aims to increase the opportunities for active travel modes, and if successful will reduce traffic emissions.





++ ++ ++ The policy aims to reduce the need to travel and to increase the opportunities for active travel choices. Successful implementation will reduce traffic volume in the town centre.



Will it reduce emissions of atmospheric pollution? Will it improve air quality?


Appendix Page 338


Can it improve the ambiance of local areas? + + + Successful implementation of the policy will improve air quality through the subsequent reduction in car traffic.

Appendix Page 339








Short term

Medium term

Long term

















Appendix Page 340








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term






Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives The policy aims to reduce the need to travel and to increase the opportunities for active travel choices. Successful implementation will reduce traffic volume in the town centre. This should reduce traffic emissions and improve air quality.

Appendix Page 341








Medium term

Long term















Appendix Page 342



0 0 0 Although the outcome may be to improve physical access to employment, the policy will not create more employment opportunities, so there are no significant impacts.







term Medium

term Long term





+ + + The policy aims to improve access to key services, both in Long Stratton and in other locations via bus services.





0 0 0 Although increased permeability will improve pedestrian access to schools, there will be no significant impact on education levels.



Appendix Page 343




+ + + Implementation of the policy will encourage active travel choices and should make the local population more disposed to walking or cycling.

Appendix Page 344








Medium term

Long term










0 0 + If development is able to improve bus service provision, this may ultimately impact upon local quality of life to a limited extent.

Summary: SA vs Social Objectives Implementation of the policy will encourage active travel choices and should make the local population more disposed to walking or cycling. It will also improve access to key services, and could make some improvement to the quality of local public transport experiences.

Appendix Page 345








Medium term

Long term





0 0 + No significant impacts in the short term, but in the longer term, local businesses in the town centre could benefit from increased business through better access.










+ + + Implementation of the policy will encourage travel by foot and cycle, thereby minimising journeys to work. Improvement in the telecommunications network will encourage homeworking arrangements.

Appendix Page 346


Appendix Page 347








Medium term

Long term




+ + + Implementation of the policy will minimise car journeys to work. Improvement in the telecommunications network will offer the opportunity for flexible work patterns.





Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives Implementation of the policy will encourage travel by foot and cycle, thereby minimising journeys to work. Improvement in the telecommunications network will encourage homeworking arrangements. In the longer term, local businesses may benefit from more local trade as local residents access local services.



There are no negative impacts from implementing the accessibility. Potential benefits include reduced traffic volume in the town centre. This should reduce traffic emissions and improve air quality. This should make the local population more disposed to walking or cycling. In the longer term, local businesses may benefit from more local trade as local residents access local services. Improved access to key services and potential improvement to the quality of local public transport experiences may result. Improvement in the telecommunications network will encourage homeworking arrangements.

Recommendations: xxx

Appendix Page 348


Appendix Page 349


Policy Development Boundary Policy






Short term

Medium term

Long term





0 0 0 No significant impact.






Appendix Page 350


Policy Long Stratton Town Centre Policy






Short term

Medium term

Long term





+ + + The policy promotes a sequential approach to development to contain and direct the location of future development.










Appendix Page 351



Appendix Page 352








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term



Will it protect the quality of landscapes and townscapes, or mitigate the effects of inappropriate development? · Will the site make a positive contribution to the local area, and enhance the character of local landscapes? · Will it reduce the amount of derelict, degraded and under-used land? · Will the District’s heritage be preserved and/or enhanced?





· Will it avoid the use of productive agricultural land? · Will it minimise the irreversible use of soil resources?



Appendix Page 353








FACTORS Short term

Medium term

Long term












Summary: SA vs Environmental Objectives There are few significant environmental impacts, other than promotion of a sequential approach to development.

Appendix Page 354








Medium term

Long term
















Appendix Page 355


Appendix Page 356








term Medium

term Long term
















Appendix Page 357








Medium term

Long term











Summary: SA vs Social Objectives No significant impacts.

Appendix Page 358








Medium term

Long term
















Appendix Page 359








Medium term

Long term










Summary: SA vs Economic Objectives No significant impacts.


Overall Conclusions to this Policy

Recommendation: There are no significant negative impacts from implementing the development boundary policy. Potential benefits are limited to those resulting from a sequential and considered approach to development.

Appendix Page 360


Appendix Page 361

Habitats Regulation Assessment of the Site Specific Allocations & Policies Document, Wymondham Area

Action Plan, Long Stratton Area Action Plan and Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan,

undertaken for South Norfolk Council

October 2013

Natural Environment Team

HRA of Site Allocations Document, Wymondham AAP, Long Stratton AAP and Cringleford Neighbourhood Plan for South Norfolk Council

October 2013

2 of 44

Habitats Regulation Assessment of the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, the Wymondham Area Action Plan, the Long Stratton Area Action

Plan and the Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan

Executive Summary

As required by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, before deciding to give consent or permission for a plan or project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, the competent authority is required to make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of that site’s conservation objectives.

This document is a record of the Habitats Regulation Assessment of the Sites

Allocation Document, undertaken for South Norfolk Council. Additionally, proposed development at Wymondham, as described in the emerging Wymondham Area Action Plan, at Long Stratton, as described in the emerging Long Stratton Area Action Plan and proposed housing in the parish of Cringleford, guided by the emerging Cringleford Draft Neighbourhood Plan, are assessed

Three groups of plans are reviewed with respect to their conclusions with respect

to potential in-combination effects. These are plans for The Greater Norwich Development Partnership, Great Yarmouth Borough Council, Breckland District Council, and The Broads Authority including local development plans and the Tourism Strategy.

An initial scoping exercise indentified the main potential impacts from development

sites within the South Norfolk are with issues relating to water abstraction and water disposal and levels of recreational disturbance. The Habitats Regulations Assessment relates to Special Protection Areas, Special Areas of Conservation and Ramsar Sites.

The GNDP water cycle study (Scott Wilson, 2010) fully assessed the potential

impacts of water abstraction and water disposal and as such, they are not addressed in detail in the current work. The suitability of this approach was agreed with Natural England (NE reference: 83415). Since the publication of the original water study, further processes relating to water abstraction were undertaken, which are summarised here.

Nine International Sites that were not scoped-out at initial stage are subjected to

tests of likely significance relating to potential impacts from recreational disturbance: Norfolk Valley Fens, The Broads SAC & Ramsar Site/Broadland SPA; Breckland SPA and Breckland SAC; The River Wensum SAC; Redgrave & South Lopham Fens Ramsar/ Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens SAC.

Having completed the Stage 1 test, it is considered that there is sufficient

confidence for significant effects to be unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on any of the International Sites. Therefore it is concluded that there is no need to undertake further stages of the HRA process.


October 2013

3 of 44

Contents

1. Introduction

1.1 Overview 1.2 Legislation & Planning Policy 1.3 The Assessment Process & Methodology 1.4 Evidence Gathering 1.5 Consultation

2. In-combination Effects

2.1 Overview 2.2 Greater Norwich Development Area 2.3 Broads Authority Area 2.4 Great Yarmouth Borough Council 2.5 Breckland District Council

3. Characterising Potential Impacts

3.1 Introduction 3.2 Scoping of Sites 3.3 Scoping-out of International Sites

4. Designated Features of Sites Not Scoped-out

4.1 Overview of Sites 4.2 Norfolk Valley Fens 4.3 Breckland SAC and SPA 4.4 The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, Broadland SPA 4.5 River Wensum SAC 4.6 Waveney & Little Ouse Fens/Redgrave & Lopham Ramsar

5. Stage1: Tests of Likely Significant Effects

5.1 Overview 5.2 Site Specific Tests of Likely Significance 5.3 Summary of Stage 1: Tests of Likely Significance

6. Concluding Remarks 7. References


October 2013

4 of 44

Habitats Regulation Assessment of the Sites Allocation Document, with the Wymondham Area Action Plan, the Long Stratton Area Action Plan and the Cringleford Neighbourhood

Development Plan

for South Norfolk Council October 2013

1. INTRODUCTION

This is a record of the Habitats Regulation Assessment of the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, the Wymondham Area Action Plan, the Long Stratton Area Action Plan and the Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan, undertaken for South Norfolk Council as the Planning Authority. The Assessment is required by Regulations 61 of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010, in accordance with the EC Habitat Directive (Council Directive 92/43/EEC) before the council as the ‘competent authority’ under the Regulations can permit development to proceed. 1.1 OVERVIEW

As required by the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (hereafter Habitats Regulations), before deciding to give consent or permission for a plan or project which is likely to have a significant effect on a European site, either alone or in combination with other plans or projects, the competent authority is required to make an appropriate assessment of the implications for that site in view of that site’s conservation objectives.

This document has been prepared by the Environment Team at Norfolk County Council on behalf of South Norfolk Council and provides a Habitats Regulations Assessment and Appropriate Assessment for the Site Specific Allocations & Policies Document, the Wymondham Area Action Plan, the Long Stratton Area Action Plan and the Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan. The purpose of this document is to assess the likely impacts, effects and mitigation associated with the allocation of sites in these four documents that may be required within the formal context of the Habitats Regulations.

The Site Allocations Document being assessed Site allocations in South Norfolk are proposed for 53 settlements ranging from Norwich fringe parishes (e.g. Easton, Costessey), to main towns (Diss, Harleston), key service centres (Hethersett, Loddon/Chedgrave) and service


October 2013

5 of 44

villages as detailed in the Joint Core Strategy (JCS). For draft Site Allocations Document see http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/planning/4620.asp The town of Wymondham is not included in the Site Specific Allocations and Policies Document, as proposed growth will be guided by an Area Action Plan. However for the purposes of the HRA work, proposed development in Wymondham as described in the draft Wymondham Area Action Plan (WAAP) is included in this study and report. The WAAP for Wymondham will guide development in the town up to 2026 in line with the need to provide at least 2,200 new homes and 20 hectares of employment land as allocated in the Joint Core Strategy. The Pre-Submission version of the WAAP allocates 2,200 dwellings. Public consultation on the draft WAAP was completed in March 2013 and the final version of the WAAP will be subject to public examination in autumn 2013. For details on the WAAP see http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/planning/1952.asp. In the parish of Long Stratton, proposed growth will be guided by an Area Action Plan. Proposed development as described in the draft Long Stratton Area Action Plan (LSAAP) is included in this study and report. The emerging LSAAP will guide development in the town up to 2026 in line with the need to provide a minimum of 1800 new homes and local employment opportunities. Public consultation on the draft AAP was completed in July 2013 and the final version of the LSAAP will be subject to public examination in 2014. For details on the LSAAP see http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/planning/4954.asp Housing growth in the Parish of Cringleford will be guided by the Cringleford Draft Neighbourhood Development Plan (NDP). The Joint Core Strategy allocates a minimum of 1,200 new dwellings to the parish up to 2026, and the Examination version of the NDP allocates 1,200 dwellings. This is in addition to the 1,000 homes already approved by SNC (at Round House Park). This plan is subject to independent examination in the autumn of 2013. For details of the NDP see http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/planning/5736.asp. A separate Habitats Regulations Assessment of the South Norfolk Development Management Policies Document has been prepared. It is available to view at http://www.south-norfolk.gov.uk/democracy/default.aspx?id=13503.xml (Appendix 14 of item 07). The conclusion of this HRA is that significant effects on any international sites are unlikely and that there is no need to undertake further stages of the HRA process. 1.2 LEGISLATION & PLANNING POLICY The need for an appropriate assessment originally arose under the requirements of the EC Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) and its implementation in the UK under the Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 were published and consolidated the legislation, updated and incorporated the various amendments made to the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 (the 1994 Regulations).


October 2013

6 of 44

On 25 July 2012, Defra laid “The Conservation of Habitats and Species (Amendment) Regulations 2012” before Parliament. These Regulations came into force on 16 August 2012. Regulation 61(5) states that “In the light of the conclusions of the assessment, and subject to regulation 62 (considerations of overriding public interest), the competent authority may agree to the plan or project only after having ascertained that it will not adversely affect the integrity of the European site “. Regulation 61(6) also states “In considering whether a plan or project will adversely affect the integrity of the site, the authority must have regard to the manner in which it is proposed to be carried out or to any conditions or restrictions subject to which they propose that the consent, permission or other authorisation should be given.” International sites covered by the Habitat Regulations The Habitats Regulations Assessment relates to Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SAC) and Ramsar Sites. SPAs SPAs are sites classified in accordance with Article 4 of the EC Directive on the conservation of wild birds (79/409/EEC), more commonly known as the Birds Directive. They are classified for rare and vulnerable birds, listed in Annex I of the Birds Directive, and for regularly occurring migratory species. Regulation 8 of the 2012 Regulations substitutes regulation 9 of the 2010 Regulations, to provide that public bodies must exercise their conservation functions specifically so as to comply with the Birds Directive. SACs SACs are classified in accordance with EC Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (the Habitats Directive). Article 3 of this Directive requires the establishment of a European network of important high-quality conservation sites that will make a significant contribution to conserving the 189 habitat types and 788 species identified in Annexes I and II of the Directive. SPAs and SACS are known as the Natura 2000 network and are commonly referred to as ‘European Sites’. Ramsar Sites Ramsar Sites are sites qualifying under the International Convention on Wetlands of International Importance, 1971, known as the Ramsar Convention (amended by the Paris Protocol, 1992). Ramsar Sites are not protected in UK law by the Birds and Habitats Directives; however parliament has decreed that, unless otherwise specified, procedures relating to SPAs and SACs will also apply to Ramsar Sites. This was reiterated in the National Planning Policy Framework


October 2013

7 of 44

(DfCLG, 2012). Thus, in this report, the term ‘International Sites’ is used to refer to Ramsar sites as well as SACs and SPAs.

Appropriate assessment:

An appropriate assessment is a decision by a 'competent authority', in this case South Norfolk Council, as to whether the proposed plan or project can be determined as not having an adverse effect on the integrity of any European sites.

An adverse effect on integrity is one that prevents the site from maintaining the same contribution to favourable status for the relevant feature or features, as it did when the site was qualifying. Only where a plan or project can be determined by the competent authority as not having an adverse effect on site integrity can it be allowed to proceed. The favourable conservation status of the site is defined through the site's conservation objectives and it is against these objectives that the effects of the plan or project must be assessed.

1.3 THE ASSESSMENT PROCESS & METHODOLOGY PROCESS

The Appropriate Assessment process is outlined below. This involves evidence gathering followed by three stages:

Evidence Gathering: Collation of documentation relating to the plan. Collecting information on relevant European sites, their conservation objectives and characteristics. Stage 1: The ‘test of likely significant effect’. Establishing whether a plan is ‘likely to have a significant effect’ on a European site, and therefore requiring the Appropriate Assessment. Stage 2: Assessment of whether there is an effect on site integrity. This is potentially a two-stage process, with a consideration of whether there are likely to be effects, followed if necessary by a detailed consideration of site-specific factors. Stage 3: Reassessment. If there is an effect on site integrity then the project should be reassessed with the inclusion of compensation and a repeat of stage 2 should then be completed.

1.4 EVIDENCE GATHERING Data on the project proposals are taken from the South Norfolk Council’s Draft Site Allocation document (April 2013 iteration). Identification of European sites was undertaken utilising the databases held by Norfolk Biodiversity Information Service (the County Records Centre for Biological and Geographical records, hereafter referred to as NBIS) and the online Multi-Agency Geographic


October 2013

8 of 44

Information for the Countryside database (hereafter referred to as MAGIC; www.magic.gov.uk). Data on the European sites, including qualifying features were taken from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee website (www.jncc.gov.uk); data on the component SSSIs, primarily the condition assessment, were taken from the Natural England website (www.naturalengland.org.uk).

In addition, a scientific literature search was undertaken using publically available search engines, grey literature reports and academic databases to utilise relevant research work.

Definition of ‘Site Integrity’

Based on definitions within Article 1 of the Habitats Directive and following English Nature (2004), now Natural England, site integrity is defined as:

For habitats:

Their range and area must be stable or increasing;

The species structure and functions necessary for long-term maintenance of the habitat exist and are likely to continue to exist for the foreseeable future; and

The status of the typical species is considered to be favourable.

For species:

The population dynamics data on the species indicate that it is maintaining itself on a long-term basis as a viable component of its natural habitats; and

The natural range is stable and likely to continue to be, and there is and will probably continue to be a sufficiently large habitat to maintain its population on a long term basis.

To help identify likely effects and potential mechanisms that could affect site integrity, English Nature (1999, 2004) proposed a checklist of questions. For the assessment to conclude that there are no adverse effects then it is necessary to show that:

The area of Annex I habitats (or composite features) will not be reduced;

There will be no direct effect on the population of the species for which the site was Qualifying or classified;


October 2013

9 of 44

There will be no indirect effects on the populations of species for which the site was Qualifying or classified due to loss or degradation of their habitat (quantity/quality);

There will be no changes to the composition of the habitats for which the site was Qualifying (e.g. reduction in species structure, abundance or diversity that comprises the habitat over time); and

That there will be no interruption or degradation of the physical, chemical or biological processes that support habitats and species for which the site was Qualifying or classified.

If it is concluded that one or more of the above is not met, or if there is uncertainty, then it is necessary to consider further site-specific factors in order to reach a decision. The key site-specific factors that need to be considered when forming judgments on site integrity (English Nature, 2004) are:

Scale of impact,

Long term effects and sustainability,

Duration of impact and recovery/reversibility,

Dynamic systems,

Conflicting feature requirements,

Off-site impacts, and

Uncertainty in cause and effect relationships and a precautionary approach.

Mitigation versus Compensatory Measures

It is generally accepted that there are three types of interacting measures to reduce impacts. The first two, avoidance and reduction, are grouped together as mitigation. In addition, there are compensatory measures. The European Commission (2007, p10) present the distinction as:

“Mitigation measures are those measures which aim to minimise, or even cancel, the negative impacts on a site that are likely to arise as a result of the implementation of a plan or project. These measures are an integral part of the specifications of a plan or project”, and

Compensatory measures in the strict sense are independent of the project (including any associated mitigation measures). They are intended to offset the


October 2013

10 of 44

negative effects of the plan or project so that the overall ecological coherence of the Natura 2000 Network is maintained.”

Tyldesley, 2011, (p13) summarises this succinctly: “Mitigation (avoidance and reduction) measures (are) built into the project and form(ing) part of the project as proposed or applied for” whereas compensatory measures are those which “do not already form part of the project but may be applied as additional conditions or restrictions”.

1.5 CONSULTATION

The competent authority must consult the appropriate nature conservation body, currently Natural England, and have regard to any representations made by that body. Consultation with a number of organisations has been undertaken. Informal conversations regarding the approach were undertaken with Natural England at the start of the process and confirmation of the appropriateness of methodology and the other plans, policies and programmes that should be considered was confirmed in an email 13 May 2013 (NE ref 83415).

Discussions on the approach and specific issues with Senior Planning Officers from the RSPB were held on 10 May 2013 at the Thorpe Road Offices. Informal discussions with spatial planners and conservation officers of the Broads Authority were held in May 2013 with a formal round-table discussion on 10 June 2013. Formal comments from the Broads Authority were sent in an email on 27 June 2013.


October 2013

11 of 44

2. IN COMBINATION EFFECTS

2.1 OVERVIEW

It is a requirement of the Habitats Regulations to undertake an in-combination assessment of plans and projects. A project or plan that affects a European site in some way, but where these effects are unlikely to be significant, may be significant when considered in combination with other plans. There are a number of plans prepared for neighbouring local authorities which may act in combination with the Site Specific Allocations and Policies document, the Wymondham Area Action Plan, the Long Stratton AAP and the Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan to result in impacts on the integrity of sites.

Three groups of plans are reviewed with respect to their conclusions with respect to potential in-combination effects. These are plans for

The Greater Norwich area (Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk districts), of which South Norfolk Council LPA is a part;

Great Yarmouth Borough Council;

Breckland District Council, and

The Broads Authority (including local development plans and the Tourism

Strategy (Broads Authority, 2011)). 2.2 GREATER NORWICH DEVELOPMENT AREA Joint Core Strategy (Mott Macdonald, 2010) As described by Mott Macdonald, the 2009 Joint Core Strategy (JCS) consultation report was subject to a Stage 1 Test of Likely Significant Effects and the following JCS policies were identified as having the potential to have significant effects on European and Ramsar designated sites:


October 2013

12 of 44

Policy 3: Energy and Water (which underpins Policies 10 & 12);

Policy 4: Housing (which underpins Policies 10 & 12);

Policy 6: Access and transportation;

Policy 10: Location for major new or expanding communities, and;

Policy 12: The remainder of the Norwich urban area, including the fringe parishes.

The Stage 2 Appropriate Assessment considered that all the above policies with the exception of Policy 6 were likely to have a significant impact, on the basis that the relevant schemes would be considered at the project level and not directly related to JCS policies.

Two main issues were considered potentially significant: hydrological issues and impacts from human disturbance. With regards to hydrological issues, measures are underway “towards a resolution of the longer term water resource requirement” (Anglian Water, Environment Agency and Natural England, 2010). Increased disturbance was assessed as a potentially significant impact of policy 4 (with any in-combination disturbance impacts from policy 12 covered under policy 4). As described for policy 4, site integrity may be impacted from: “In-combination impacts associated with area-wide growth, resulting in increased visitor pressure on European designated sites in combination with growth in neighbouring local authority areas.” The identified International Sites were:

Broads SAC; Broadland Ramsar & SPA; Breckland SPA & SAC; Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA; Winterton – Horsey Dunes SAC; and North Norfolk Coast SAC, SPA & Ramsar.

2.3 BROADS AUTHORITY AREA Core Strategy (Broads Authority, 2006) The Habitats Regulations Assessment for the Core Strategy concluded that none of the policies presented a significant risk to site integrity. Specifically it concluded that “any risks will be prevented by the Holistic interpretation of Core Strategy policies, using Core Strategy Policy 2 for sites designated with


October 2013

13 of 44

European and National Importance”. Core Strategy Policy 2 states that: “policies will take into account National & European designated conservation sites”. The most relevant Core Strategy Policies (CS) to which this applies are CS 2 (protecting and enhancing new water space), CS 4 (creation of new resources), CS 9 (sustainable tourism), CS 10 (tourist and recreation development), CS 14 (additional moorings), CS 15 (safe navigation), CS 16 and CS 17 (accessing The Broads in a sustainable manner) and CS 19 (sustainable locations for medium/larger visitor developments. Two sites were identified as possibly at risk of impacts namely Breydon Water SPA and Ramsar Site (CS 10); and The Broads SAC/ Ramsar Site/ Broadland SPA (CS 10, CS 16 and CS 17). For both sites CS 2 is identified as the key policy for justifying site-by-site assessment of impacts. Development Management Policies (Wildfrontier Ecology, 2011) For the Broads Development Management Policies, the HRA assessment was undertaken as an iterative process. Revisions to the wording and the subsequent strengthening of some policies resulted in the conclusion that impacts on site integrity were unlikely. However, if a proposal is considered in the context of a given policy to have an effect on an internationally designated site then it will need to be considered against the Habitats Directive and a project level Appropriate Assessment will need to be undertaken. Site Specific Policies (Interim Draft HRA) (Wildfrontier Ecology, 2012) An assessment of the ‘finer scale’ policies within the Broads Authority concluded that significant effects on site integrity were possible for The Broads SAC, Broadland SPA and Winterton – Horsey Dunes SAC and Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA. The draft policies of possible concern were those potentially resulting in disturbance or hydrological issues at the named settlements of Cantley, Brundall, Great Yarmouth marina, Horning and Oulton Broad. Non-settlement draft policies with potential impacts were those relating to management works at Horsey and St Benet’s Abbey. In each case, minor revisions to the wording of individual draft policies resulted in a revised assessment where no impact on site integrity was concluded.


October 2013

14 of 44

Tourism Strategy (Broads Authority 2011)

The Tourism Strategy for The Broads has not been subject to a HRA (confirmed by email from an officer from the Broads Authority 29 January 2013). The Tourism Strategy aspires that by the year 2015 there will be increased visitors to the Broads, with proportionally more in the southern Broads and with more visitors out of season. Ecotourism is recognised as a major product and market opportunity, and the strategy aspires that there is tangible evidence that overall environmental quality has further increased with the support of tourism.

With particular relevance to the current HRA work for the South Norfolk Council Site Allocation documents, the Tourism Strategy makes reference to local residents (as opposed to visitors from outside the area). In particular, an area for action included a desire to raise local residents’ awareness of the Broads product (p42). It states that the “continuing importance of the day visitor market has been highlighted in this strategy. Business can be generated not only from residents in and around the area but also from their visiting friends and relatives. It is believed that local awareness of Broads products and experiences is still quite patchy.”

Also relevant in the current HRA work are the aims of the Tourism Strategy to:

Strengthen visitor awareness of opportunities in the peripheral parts of the Broads by providing good information about what can be found at the end of each waterway and how it may differ from the busier, more congested parts, by encouraging further development of relevant product in the upper reaches, for example by canoe, by providing trails and guided walks and wildlife trips and by taking care to manage the scale and distribution of new activity in sensitive areas, with appropriate advice from conservation managers.

Monitor proposed improved or promoted access to ensure adequate

protection is in place to safeguard Qualifying and important wildlife habitats and species.

2.4 GREAT YARMOUTH BOROUGH COUNCIL Waterfront Area Action Plan and Core Strategy of the Great Yarmouth Local Development Framework As reported by Grant (2010) in the HRA of the Waterfront Area Action Plan, the Core Strategy identified the following likely significant effects:

Recreational pressures from increased numbers of visitors to Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC, Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA and Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar;


October 2013

15 of 44

Urban effects, such as litter and lighting, on Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC and Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA; and

Surface run-off resulting in a deterioration of water quality in watercourses,

which in turn could have an effect on the Broads SAC and Broadlands SPA/Ramsar and Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar.

The HRA of the Waterfront Area Action Plan concluded that there could be possible impacts on site integrity from water quality and hydrology of The Broads SAC/Broadlands SPA/Ramsar and Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar. It also recognised potential impacts from recreation on the dunes at Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC and disturbance at Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar and disturbance to nesting little tern at Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA. The Consultation Draft of the HRA of the Great Yarmouth Local Plan Core Strategy (Footprint Ecology & David Tyldesley & Associates, 2012) detailed and up-dated assessment of current and future recreational use of on the Winterton-Horsey Dunes SAC, Breydon Water SPA/Ramsar and Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA including a full discussion of visitor surveys and potential impacts. 2.5 BRECKLAND DISTRICT COUNCIL Core Strategy and Development Control Development Plan Document In considering the implications of the Breckland Core Strategy and Development Control Policies document for European sites, an Appropriate Assessment was undertaken (Liley D. et al., 2008). The document concludes that “A number of policies within this proposed Core Strategy and Development Control Policies document were considered to have significant effects that would be likely, or that a precautionary approach would need to be taken as it could not be determined that particular plan policies would not have a significant effect upon any European site. In light of the findings of the Habitats Regulations Assessment, it was recognised that mitigation measures must be put in place to remove any significant effects or likely significant effects that the plan may have on European sites. Mitigation measures included amendments made to policies to remove elements that could have an effect, or to require other actions that can eliminate any effects. The policies in this document that have an effect on European sites have been amended to ensure that the qualifying features are not harmed, as well as considering other measures that will be necessary. These mitigation measures are incorporated throughout the document where necessary. In some cases, the mitigation measures necessary have in themselves had a significant role in shaping the final direction of the Core Strategy as well as particular policies.”


October 2013

16 of 44

In particular, the potential for new development to lead to disturbance on breeding birds was recognised. To ensure that there are no significant effects on European habitats and species a policy was created to ensure that new development will only be permitted within 1,500m of SPAs that are suitable for stone curlew if it can be demonstrated, through an appropriate assessment under the Habitats Regulations, that there will be no adverse impact on the qualifying features. Beyond the SPA boundary, on other land suitable for stone curlew or where they are present, a 1,500m development restriction buffer operates. These are areas where there have been five nesting attempts or more since 1995 or where other conditions are suitable, such as soil type. In these areas development may also be acceptable providing alternative land outside the SPA can be secured to mitigate any potential effects. 3. CHARACTERISING POTENTIAL IMPACTS 3.1 INTRODUCTION The main potential impacts identified in relation to development sites within the South Norfolk are with issues relating to water abstraction and water disposal and levels of recreational disturbance. These are discussed below. Water abstraction and water disposal In the Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Joint Core Strategy, hydrological issues were assessed. The GNDP water cycle study (Scott Wilson, 2010) fully assessed the potential impacts of water abstraction and water disposal. As such, they are not addressed in detail in the current HRA work here. The suitability of this approach was agreed with Natural England in early consultations and confirmed in an email of 13 May 2013 (NE reference: 83415). Since the publication of the original Mott Macdonald (2010) HRA, further planning and legal processes were undertaken, which have been summarised by Anglian Water, Environment Agency and Natural England (2012) as follows: “In brief, (the Appropriate Assessment) concluded that it was highly unlikely that the (Joint Core Strategies) JCS policies would have a significant direct or indirect impact on European and Ramsar designated sites. However, the report highlighted some areas of uncertainty regarding potential in combination and cumulative effects associated with water resources, water quality, water efficiency, growth and tourism on such sites, because of the dependence on the effectiveness and implementation of mitigation measures and actions required to avoid adverse impact on site integrity.” The mitigation measures suggested were:


October 2013

17 of 44

The implementation of green infrastructure developments

The allocation of green space to protect specific natural assets and designated sites to be implemented through area action plans.

The implementation of water infrastructure improvements (for water resources and waste water treatment) and water efficient measures as recommended in the water cycle study, enforced through Anglian Water’s Water Resource Management Plan in ensuring that sufficient water supplies can be made available to meet planned growth and as supported by the position statements issued by Anglian Water, Natural England and the Environment Agency “In the short term, Anglian Water has demonstrated that their existing licensed resources supplying the Greater Norwich area are sufficient to serve projected development beyond the current AMP which ends in 2015, while capping abstractions at Costessey below historic levels. This has been established through an addendum to the original HRA.

While a solution to the longer term water resources issue has not been finalised, the process is progressing as agreed, and Anglian Water has submitted a document outlining a range of potential solutions. This is currently subject to discussions with the other bodies.

Under the circumstances, all parties agree that the conclusion of the Habitats Regulations Assessment dated February 2010 remains unchanged, subject to the progress noted above in working towards a resolution of the longer term water resource requirement.”

As such, potential impacts of water abstraction and water disposal are not considered in the information towards an Appropriate Assessment presented in this document.

Disturbance

Of principal importance to this assessment are trampling effects on vegetation and the disturbance of birds, both on breeding birds and those that winter in the East of England.

The most visible impact on most habitats is direct trampling effects, destroying vegetation, preventing re-growth and compressing soils. Related mechanisms include nutrient enrichment from dog fouling and even irresponsible behaviour such as fires and littering.

Assessing the potential impacts from recreational disturbance is not straightforward. Species react differently to one another; effects may vary seasonally and in different weather and relating the behaviour of individual animals to population integrity is complicated. Furthermore data on human visitor


October 2013

18 of 44

numbers and usage across all months and all areas of International Sites will always be deficient. Some of the issues relating to recreational disturbance have been succinctly summarised by Ecology Consultancy (2013) and are included in Box 1 below.

Box 1: Recreational disturbance from housing growth – Problems in assessing impact on biodiversity (from Ecology Consultancy, 2013).

The significance of disturbance is one of the 100 key policy questions for ecological research (Sutherland et al., 2006). A key question in disturbance research is how to scale individual impacts to the population level, which is required when establishing effects on site integrity. The interpretation of disturbance effects is potentially confounded by a range of factors including differences in behavioural responses among species, the impact on individual condition or ‘fitness’ and consequent impacts on survival and reproduction. Effects are also dependant on the availability of alternative feeding areas and resource availability and weather (Goss-Custard et al., 2006).

Among the factors that confound the interpretation of observational studies of disturbance is the potential difference among species in their responses. Thus, some bird species may fly away or leave an area when disturbed but others may remain but nevertheless feed at a lower rate, with impacts on individual fitness. Some studies may interpret such an absence of an obvious response as tolerance or habituation to disturbance, while the opposite may be true (Gill et al., 2001a).

Thus, in reviewing the impacts of disturbance on birds a precautionary approach should be applied, with an appreciation of the interplay of factors and difficulties in the scaling from behaviour to individual and population level effects.

Projecting increases in disturbance in relation to housing is difficult. Although some work has shown a correlation between housing and visitor numbers (e.g. Jones et al., 2003) the predictive models work well for the numbers of visitors arriving by foot but are much less able to show links between housing numbers and density and visitors arriving by car (Liley et al., 2006). A myriad of factors would be expected to determine the numbers of visitors, including general factors such as the weather and economic conditions, more regional factors such as road and rail accessibility, and local factors such as the proximity of toilets and other facilities. The availability and/or introduction of alternative facilities that may displace visitor numbers is also a key issue, particularly in ensuring that estimates of visitor impact are made on a consistent basis.

Even with an understanding of the actual and projected numbers of visitors, the disturbance experienced by individual birds will vary according to local conditions, possibly including proximity, sight lines and the feeding quality of habitats. Generally, however, disturbance which limits food accessibility at critical times of the year, particularly for open-habitat dwelling bird species, as well as disturbances on the breeding grounds, are the most disturbing types of activity.

Generally, however, visitors to wetland reserves can be appropriately managed by the use of spatial and temporal zoning of activities, screening at sensitive locations and visitor management policies that reflect the site specific conditions and the species potentially affected. Details are provided in Kirby et al. (2004). The RSPB and Wildlife Trusts successfully integrate visitors and nature conservation across a broad range of sites in the UK. Further, the proximity of the disturbance source and its type, substantially affects a bird species response to that disturbance. Disturbance from vehicles along roads adjacent to sites of bird interest may be generally habituated for whereas people walking through an open area can cause significant disturbance to certain species that rely on open habitats with good sight-lines, but this type of disturbance is far less disturbing than someone using a shotgun, for example (see Hill et al., 1997).


October 2013

19 of 44

3.2 SCOPING OF SITES The International Sites considered within the scoping exercise are those identified in the HRA produced for the Joint Core Strategy (Mott Macdonald, 2010). It identified housing delivery and associated disturbance as being a potential impact for the following sites:

The Broads SAC; Broadland SPA and The Broads Ramsar Site; Breckland SPA & SAC; Great Yarmouth North Denes SPA; Winterton – Horsey Dunes SAC; North Norfolk Coast SPA, SAC and Ramsar Site.

Although these are the sites listed in HRA for the JCS, there are other sites that are near to the South Norfolk District boundary or are within 10km of settlements with Site Allocations in the Site Allocation Document. All such sites are considered in this scoping exercise. International sites within South Norfolk: It should be recognised that in comparison to the rest of the county, the district of South Norfolk has very few international sites, and none are entirely within the district boundary (Figure1). Most of the Norfolk International Sites are not continuous but are comprised of a number of separate ‘component units’. Four small component units of The Broads SAC/Broadland SPA are within South Norfolk between Surlingham and Loddon with two other very small component units near Geldeston on the District’s southern boundary. The River Wensum SAC forms the northern boundary of the district in the area near Costessey although for most of this section the SAC designation is mostly confined to the river channel rather than the wider floodplain. The HRA work for the JCS did not include the Norfolk Valley Fens SAC, a large group of around 20 component units dispersed widely through the county. Two component units of the Norfolk Valley Fens SAC are within South Norfolk, Coston Fen near Runhall and Florden Common. International sites outside the District: The majority of The Broads SAC/Broadland SPA/Ramsar sites are to the north of the South Norfolk District being north of the River Yare between Great Yarmouth and Stalham in North Norfolk. Some small component units are associated with the River Waveney to the west of Lowestoft. Breydon Water SPA is to the east of the district. The extensive Breckland SPA/SACs are located to the south-west of the district in Breckland area of Norfolk and Suffolk with the nearest component units approximately 10 km from the boundary alongside the A11 (Bridgham and Brettenham Heath SSSI, Weeting Heath SSSI, Stanford Training Area SSSI,


October 2013

20 of 44

Cranberry Rough SSSI) and around 7km from the South Norfolk District boundary near to Diss (Breckland Forest SSSI). A component unit of the Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens SAC is located near to the District Boundary near Diss (Redgrave and Lopham Fen SSSI). This site is partly in Breckland DC area and partly in Mid Suffolk DC and is also a Ramsar site. The North Norfolk Coast international sites are >40km from the district boundary at the nearest point, whilst the Benacre to East Bavents SAC/SPA are approximately 10km to the south. A full list of International Sites in and around South Norfolk District is listed in Table 1.

HRA of Site Allocations Document, Wymondham AAP, Long Stratton AAP and Cringleford Neighbourhood Plan for South Norfolk Council October 2013

21 of 44

Figure 1: International Sites mentioned in the text


October 2013

22 of 44

Table 1: International Sites with component units in or near South Norfolk District Boundary

Site name Status Summary of

designated features

Vulnerabilities (from Mott

Macdonald, 2008)

The Broads

Ramsar Wetland habitats, plants birds, and other animals.

None cited, but probably as for SAC with disturbance likely to be a factor. Estimates of tourist numbers to the Broads and environs are estimated at 6.9 million p.a. of which 84% are day visitors (Broads Authority, 2011)

The Broads SAC Wetland vegetation, plants and other animals.

Sea level rise, abstraction reducing flows in northern rivers, eutrophication from sewage and agricultural runoff

Broadland SPA Wetland birds. None cited, but probably as for The Broads SAC with disturbance likely to be a factor. Estimates of tourist numbers to the Broads and environs are estimated at 6.9 million p.a. of which 84% are day visitors (Broads Authority, 2011)

River Wensum

SAC Aquatic vegetation and animals.

Development on flood plain, agricultural eutrophication and run-off, abstraction, non-native species

Norfolk Valley Fens SAC Wetland vegetation and plants; invertebrates

Reduction in management and groundwater abstraction

Breydon Water

SPA

Wetland and estuarine birds

Disturbance to a high tide roost of wading birds, drainage of wet grassland, ‘pressure’ from development of Great Yarmouth

Breydon Water

Ramsar

Wetland and estuarine birds

None cited, but probably as for the SPA Great Yarmouth

North Denes

SPA Breeding little terns Reduced accretion, predators and disturbance from people and dogs

Winterton – Horsey Dunes

SAC Dune habitats and great crested newts

Cessation of erosion and accretion due to sea defences, beach feeding with inappropriate sand, water abstraction and visitors causing disturbance, erosion & fires

Breckland

SPA Heathland birds Nitrogen deposition, egg collecting.

Breckland SAC Heathland vegetation and Reduction in grazing and cutting,


October 2013

23 of 44

habitats; Breckland meres and alluvial forest; great crested newt and barbastelle bat

nitrogen deposition, recreation, groundwater abstraction

Redgrave & South Lopham Fens

Ramsar

Wetland habitat and a spider

None cited, but probably as for the Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens

Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens

SAC Wetland vegetation; Desmoulin’s whorl snail

Loss of traditional management, water abstraction

Benacre to East Bavents

SPA Wetland birds Sea level rise and erosion.

Benacre to East Bavents Lagoons

SAC Coastal lagoon habitat and alluvial forest

None cited, but probably as for the SPA

The Wash and North Norfolk Coast

SAC Coastal and marine habitats and vegetation; common seal, grey seal and otter

Sea level rise, storm surges, erosion, abstraction and disturbance from tourism

North Norfolk Coast SAC Coastal and marine habitats and vegetation; common seal, otter and great crested newt and petalwort


North Norfolk Coast

SPA Wetland and coastal birds


North Norfolk Coast

Ramsar

Coastal and marine habitats and vegetation; birds and other animals


3.3 SCOPING-OUT OF INTERNATIONAL SITES The HRA work for the JCS concluded that growth proposed in the strategy could have an impact on International Sites as a result of disturbance from recreation. However proposed new dwellings are not evenly distributed throughout the Greater Norwich Area. Many of the site allocations where growth is proposed are a considerable distance from any International Site. This is particularly true in South Norfolk District where the International Sites are at the fringes of, or beyond, the district boundary. As the distance an International Site is from a settlement increases, the potential impact from recreational pressure from home owners in that settlement is likely to decrease. It should be possible to scope out International Sites based on their distance from Site Allocations. In the first stage of the screening process a 40km radius was used to identify International Sites that are unlikely to be impacted from development in South Norfolk. This distance is twice that used as a buffer in the HRA of the Breckland Core Strategy (Liley et al., 2008; p 10), a distance determined from experience of visitor survey work in relation to designated sites in the New Forest. The distance is similar to the 50km cut-off as the distance travelled by day-visitors used by


October 2013

24 of 44

Liley (2008) in assessing housing impacts on the North Norfolk Coast, although he acknowledged that housing further away may be relevant. Although in-combination effects with housing plans with other areas is possible, guidance is taken from Mott Macdonald (2010, p18) and consideration is predominantly given to neighbouring local authorities. Using this approach, the North Norfolk International Sites can be scoped out. This is considered reasonable as the North Norfolk Coast is a major tourist destination which receives many staying visitors. Residents from South Norfolk will be likely to make a small contribution to day visitors given drive times to the coast and the proposed growth in the north of the county (North Norfolk DC, Norwich City, Broadland DC, Breckland DC and Kings Lynn and West Norfolk BC). Clearly it is not just distance from an International Site that will determine the potential impact of recreational disturbance. The size of an existing settlement and its proposed proportional growth will also be a factor. In South Norfolk, the number of proposed new homes in many smaller settlements is very small; the Site Allocation Document states that 10 Service Villages in the Norwich Policy Area (NPA) and 32 other Service Villages will all have between 10 – 20 new dwellings. For settlements with small numbers of site allocations or few proposed new dwellings, a distance of 5km is used to scope-out International Sites that are unlikely to be impacted from development. This distance was selected from that recommended from work by Natural England (2006) and is based on a number of studies undertaken in Southern England (Bracknell Forest Council (2011). As a scoping exercise to identify which International Sites are potentially at risk, the criterion for a site to be scoped-out is that it is likely to be unattractive to visitors from South Norfolk at least in relative terms. This may be via a combination of isolation by distance in absolute terms, the low relative increase in the numbers of visitors compared to those attributable to nearer conurbations or the absence of reasonable attractions for recreational users from South Norfolk. An element of opinion is used in assigning this criterion, based on the available information on visitor activity. For example, work by Dolman et al. (2008) in Breckland who undertook a survey of visitors actually using semi-natural areas as opposed to more formal tourist attractions determined that 43% of visitors were from within 5km and another 20% from 5-10km. Given the very small number of settlements in South Norfolk that are within this distance from the Breckland International Sites and against the proposed 9000 housing allocation for the Breckland District Council, it is unlikely that visitors from the majority of South Norfolk settlements will contribute significant numbers of visitors in relative or absolute terms. An exception may be Wymondham. The WAAP indicates that the Town of Wymondham will provide at least 2,200 new homes and 20 hectares of employment land and access from Wymondham to the Breckland International Sites is reasonable, as the A11 provides a relatively direct route.


October 2013

25 of 44

However the distance from South Wymondham to the nearest unit of the Breckland International Site (Breckland Forest SSSI/SAC at Bridgham) is in excess of 20km, a distance that the work by Dolman (2008) indicates would result in few visitors. The presence or absence of facilities for visitors will also affect the magnitude of potential impacts. Factors that make sites less attractive include limited car parking and the absence of toilets, cafes and other facilities. Some International Sites in Norfolk are highly managed by NGOs and actively encourage visitors. Sites like Strumpshaw Fen (RSPB) and Hickling (Norfolk Wildlife Trust) are heavily promoted and have the infrastructure capacity to take more recreational use. In 2011 there were 28,000 visitors to RSPB Strumpshaw Reserve (Visit England, 2012). Potential adverse impacts on such promoted sites from growth are limited and additionally they encourage visitors away from more vulnerable areas of International Sites.

In Norfolk, special measures are taken by conservation organisations for some bird species that are vulnerable to disturbance. For example, in the Breckland SPA, several nature reserves owned by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust, together with other land with ‘open’ access, are closed to visitors when stone curlew Burhinus oedicnemus are breeding. This access restriction is stringently enforced and is considered effective, not least because there has been a steady increase in the population in eastern England from fewer than 100 pairs in 1985 to circa 280 pairs today (RSPB, 2013) and the stone curlew was moved from the 'Birds of Conservation Concern' red list to amber list in 2009. Breeding colonies of other species are carefully wardened, for example the little terns Sterna albifrons at Great Yarmouth North Denes by the RSPB and volunteers. These specific measures designed to reduce disturbance have been taken into account in the scoping exercise.

Local factors are also important. A site that is accessible by a direct, fast road may be an attractive draw to visitors such as dog walkers, even if the absolute distance between the site and a settlement is quite great. It should also be remembered that the topography of Norfolk can influence the accessibility of sites. Two locations either side of a Norfolk river can be a few tens of metres apart but drive time between the two points may be in excess of 45 minutes. The International Sites scoped-out by these criteria are shown in Table 2.


October 2013

26 of 44

Table 2: The International Sites scoped-out in Stage 1 of the HRA process

Site Name Status Justification

SCOPED OUT Great Yarmouth North Denes

SPA Additional numbers of residents in South Norfolk will be minor relative to proposed housing allocations of 4000 in the Great Yarmouth Borough Council area. Further, in the context of Great Yarmouth as a major tourist resort additional visitor pressure is unlikely to contribute significantly. In 2008 there were 1.3 million staying visitors and 3.7 million day visitors (GYBC 2009). The presence of the designated feature – a colony of little terns – is advertised by the local tourism website and is protected by RSPB volunteers (Enterprise GY, 2012).

The Wash and North Norfolk Coast SAC

Largely to the west part of the North Norfolk coast, this site is scoped-out on the basis of distance and that substantial parts are managed as nature reserves with subsequent controls on visitor access.

The North Norfolk Coast

SAC A major tourist area. Residents from South Norfolk will be likely to make a small contribution to day visitors given drive times to the coast and the proposed growth in the north of the county (North Norfolk DC, Norwich City, Broadland DC, Breckland DC and Kings Lynn and West Norfolk BC)


SPA A major tourist area. Residents from South Norfolk will be likely to make a small contribution to day visitors given drive times to the coast and the proposed growth in the north of the county (North Norfolk DC, Norwich City, Broadland DC, Breckland DC and Kings Lynn and West Norfolk BC)


Ramsar

A major tourist area. Residents from South Norfolk will be likely to make a small contribution to day visitors given drive times to the coast and the proposed growth in the north of the county (North Norfolk DC, Norwich City, Broadland DC, Breckland DC and Kings Lynn and West Norfolk BC)

Winterton – Horsey Dunes

SAC Part of a major tourist area but with very limited facilities. The site is distant from most South Norfolk Settlements with other larger housing schemes closer in Broadland District Council area and Great Yarmouth Area. The HRA work for the Gt Yarmouth Core Strategy concluded that it was “unlikely proposed development of such a scale as to have an effect will be sufficiently close to the site for effects to occur at significantly increased levels” (Footprint Ecology, 2012).

Breydon Water

SPA Part of a major tourist area but with very limited facilities and distant or inaccessible from settlements in South Norfolk with substantial growth proposed in Gt Yarmouth and Lowestoft. The HRA work for the Gt Yarmouth Core Strategy concluded that access levels will continue to be low and will therefore have no significant disturbance effect on the SPA (Footprint Ecology & David Tyldesley, 2012)

Breydon Water

Ramsar Part of a major tourist area but with very limited facilities and distant or inaccessible from settlements in South Norfolk with substantial growth proposed in Gt Yarmouth and Lowestoft. The HRA work for the Gt Yarmouth Core Strategy concluded that access levels will continue to be low and will therefore have no significant disturbance effect on


October 2013

27 of 44

the Ramsar Site (Footprint Ecology & David Tyldesley, 2012)

Benacre to East Bavents

SPA Distant from settlements in the Site Allocations and with other larger housing schemes closer at Great Yarmouth, Lowestoft and Beccles. The HRA work for the Gt Yarmouth Core Strategy assessed the cumulative growth as not likely to cause impacts (Footprint Ecology & David Tyldesley, 2012)

Benacre to East Bavents Lagoons

SAC Distant from settlements in the Site Allocations and with other larger housing schemes closer at Great Yarmouth, Lowestoft and Beccles. The HRA work for the Gt Yarmouth Core Strategy assessed the cumulative growth as not likely to cause impacts (Footprint Ecology & David Tyldesley, 2012)

NOT SCOPED-OUT

Norfolk Valley Fens

SAC Component units likely to be unattractive to visitors in the main, lacking sophisticated facilities and attracting visitors only from a very small local catchment. The component units within South Norfolk are Coston Fen – a private site with no visitor access - and Flordon Common. The latter site is open access common land but facilities for visitors are few, with limited parking and it is not promoted as a site to access. However, the component unit of Flordon Common SSSI cannot be scoped out.

Breckland SAC Distant from the most of the South Norfolk Settlements with available data showing some 63% of visitors from within 10km. Additional numbers of residents from Site Allocations likely to be minor relative to proposed housing allocations in the Breckland DC area. Some parts include visitor facilities but majority of site remote from facilities. However, some settlements have reasonable or good road access to the SAC – Diss (A1066; 200 dwellings) and settlements on A11 including Hethersett (1000 dwellings), Wymondham (2,200 dwellings) and Cringleford (1,200) although these last two are not part of the Site Allocation Document. The probable increase in size of these settlements means the component units near to South Norfolk District (Bridgham and Brettenham Heath SSSI and units of Breckland Forest SSSI ) cannot be scoped out.

Breckland SPA Distant from the most of the South Norfolk Settlements with available data showing some 63% of visitors from within 10km. Additional numbers of residents from Site Allocations likely to be minor relative to proposed housing allocations in the Breckland DC area. Some parts include visitor facilities but majority of site remote from facilities. However, some settlements have reasonable or good road access to the SPA – Diss (A1066; 200 dwellings) and settlements on A11 including Hethersett (1000 Dwellings), Wymondham (2,200 dwellings) and Cringleford (1,200) although these last two are not part of the Site Allocation Document. The probable increase in size of these settlements means the component units near to South Norfolk District (Bridgham and Brettenham Heath SSSI and units of Breckland Forest SSSI ) cannot be scoped out.


October 2013

28 of 44

The Broads SAC Part of a major tourist area, the site is distant from most South Norfolk Settlements with other larger housing schemes closer in Broadland District Council area and Great Yarmouth Area. However four SSSI component units are close to settlements in South Norfolk – Loddon & Chedgrave (100–200 dwellings) - so cannot be scoped out.

Broadland SPA Part of a major tourist area, the site is distant from most South Norfolk Settlements with other larger housing schemes closer in Broadland District Council area and Great Yarmouth Area. However four SSSI component units are close to settlements in South Norfolk (Loddon & Chedgrave <200 dwellings) - so cannot be scoped out.

The Broads

Ramsar

Part of a major tourist area, the site is distant from most South Norfolk Settlements with other larger housing schemes closer in Broadland District Council area and Great Yarmouth Area. However four SSSI component units are close to settlements in South Norfolk (Loddon & Chedgrave <200 dwellings) - so cannot be scoped out.

River Wensum SAC Potentially used for recreation but facilities very limited. But due to proximity to growth in Costessey/Easton, the most southerly component units cannot be scoped out.

Redgrave & South Lopham Fens

Ramsar

Very small site, >5km distant from settlements with significant site allocations (Diss) and with little attraction to casual visitors and few facilities. But can not be scoped out given the probable number of new dwellings in Diss.

Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens

SAC Very small component unit (Redgrave & South Lopham Fens), >5km distant from settlements with significant site allocations (Diss) and with little attraction to casual visitors and few facilities. But can not be scoped out given the probable number of new dwellings in Diss.


October 2013

29 of 44

4. DESIGNATED FEATURES OF SITES NOT SCOPED-OUT 4.1 OVERVIEW OF SITES Nine sites are not scoped-out for the HRA on the basis that Component Units are potentially close enough to settlements with Site Allocations Documents and likely to attract visitors:

Norfolk Valley Fens The Broads SAC, The Broads Ramsar Site and the Broadland SPA; Breckland SPA and Breckland SAC; The River Wensum SAC; Redgrave & South Lopham Fens Ramsar/ Waveney and Little Ouse

Valley Fens SAC 4.2 NORFOLK VALLEY FENS Norfolk Valley Fens is a European Site comprising of a number of SSSI component units of valley-head spring-fed fens. Such spring-fed flush fens are very rare in the lowlands. Most of the vegetation is of the small sedge fen type, mainly M13 Schoenus nigricans – Juncus subnodulosus mire, but there are transitions to reedswamp and other fen and wet grassland types. The individual fens vary in their structure according to intensity of management and provide a wide range of variation. There is a rich flora, including grass-of-Parnassus Parnassia palustris, common butterwort Pinguicula vulgaris, marsh helleborine Epipactis palustris and narrow-leaved marsh-orchid Dactylorhiza traunsteineri. These are very ancient wetlands and several support strong populations of Desmoulin`s whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana and Narrow-mouthed whorl snail Vertigo angustior as part of a rich assemblage of Red Data Book and Nationally Scarce species in standing water habitat. These alkaline fens are generally small in area and surrounded by intensively-farmed land. They are very vulnerable to reductions on the water table and a decrease in the volume of spring flows arising from groundwater abstraction. In recent decades scrub and woodland has spread due to the cessation of traditional cutting and grazing management and the drying-out of the fens. These sites are now largely isolated from the rural economy of which they were once a part, and in many instances this traditional management has become uneconomic. Two component units are in the South Norfolk district boundary, Flordon Common SSSI and Coston Fen, Runhall SSSI.


October 2013

30 of 44

Flordon Common SSSI Flordon Common is a 10 hectare site situated in the valley of the River Tas on shallow fenland peats. Springs emerge on the valley-side bearing base-rich waters from the underlying chalk and in these areas species-rich calcareous fen has developed. On higher ground unimproved pasture is present. The Common continues to be managed in a traditional manner by light summer grazing and this has ensured the survival of many locally uncommon plants. A strong population of Narrow-mouthed whorl snail Vertigo angustior occurs in flushed grassland. Natural England condition assessment (April 2013) states 79.4% of the area is in unfavourable recovering condition with the remaining area in favourable condition. The maintenance of water levels and a correct grazing regime are considered the most important factors in ensuring the site meets its conservation objectives. The site is registered common land with unrestricted access and a public footpath skirts the southern boundary. Coston Fen, Runhall SSSI Coston Fen is a spring-line fen of 7.3 hectares situated on a slope of the Yare Valley along its upper reaches. There is movement of calcareous groundwater from a seepage zone along the top of the slope down to a collecting drain along the base, and this has resulted in the development of a wide diversity of open fen habitats, including a nationally rare calcareous mire community which is largely confined to East Anglia. The site supports a number of locally uncommon plants. Natural England condition assessment (April 2013) states 100% of the area is in unfavourable no change condition. The reason for this condition appears to be related to water abstraction, with investigations ongoing. The site is private and there are no public rights of way in the locality. 4.3 BRECKLAND SPA AND SAC

The Breckland of Norfolk and Suffolk lies in the heart of East Anglia on largely sandy soils of glacial origin. In the 19th century the area was termed a sandy waste, with small patches of arable cultivation that were soon abandoned. The continental climate, with low rainfall and free-draining soils, has led to the development of dry heath and grassland communities. Much of Breckland was planted with conifers through the 20th century, and elsewhere arable farming is the predominant land use. The remnants of dry heath and grassland that have survived these changes support heathland-breeding birds, where grazing by sheep and rabbits is sufficiently intensive to create short turf and open ground. These species have also adapted to live in forestry and arable habitats. Woodlark Lullula arborea and Nightjar Caprimulgus europaeus breed in recently


October 2013

31 of 44

felled areas and open heath areas within the conifer plantations, while Stone Curlew Burhinus oedicnemus establishes nests on open ground provided by arable cultivation in the spring.

The designated features of the SPA are:

Breckland Forest SSSI component units: breeding woodlark and nightjar, rare plants and invertebrates, geology

Breckland Farmland SSSI component units: breeding stone curlew (population increasing)

Breckland Heathland SSSIs (various sites): breeding stone curlew (population declining), nightjar and woodlark, grassland and heath habitats.

The designated features of the SAC are:

Inland dunes, natural eutrophic lakes, dry heaths, alluvial forests and great

crested newt. There are 12 component SSSI in Breckland DC area, of which Bridgham & Brettenham Heaths SSSI is the nearest to South Norfolk. The SSSI is situated <10km to the north and east of Thetford is linked to East Wretham Heath SSSI and through this to the Stanford Training Area, thus forming the largest remaining block of Breckland heath. Cranberry Rough, Hockham SSSI is c10km from the South Norfolk boundary. Bridgham & Brettenham Heaths SSSI The site is 446 hectares of Breckland heather and grass heath. The soils are predominantly acid sands, heavily podsolised in places, but areas of surface chalk are present particularly to the east. Vegetation is mostly heather and acid grassland with considerable ares of bracken and some scrub. The site is part-owned by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust who manage access and close parts of the reserve when stone curlew are nesting. The Natural England condition assessment states 13.0% of the area is in favourable condition with 87.0% unfavourable, recovering. Threats are nutrient deposition, run-off, scrub invasion and inappropriate recreation. East Wretham Heath SSSI The SSSI is 141 hectares of Breckland meres and grassland with its principle scientific interest being the two fluctuating meres, Ringmere and Langmere, supplied by chalk ground water. Secondary woodland and scrub are present. The site is owned by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust who manage access. The Natural England condition assessment states 41.6% of the area is in favourable condition with 58.4% unfavourable, recovering. Threats are nutrient deposition, run-off, scrub invasion and inappropriate recreation.


October 2013

32 of 44

Stanford Training Area SSSI The SSSI covers 4681 hectares of extensive Breckland grassland and heath with mature woodland, carr woodland, streams and fluctuating meres. Stone curlew breed. The area is a live-firing zone and no public access is allowed. The Natural England condition assessment states 41.8% of the area is in favourable condition with 37.4% unfavourable, recovering and 20.8% no change. Threats are lack of management of bracken and scrub invasion, poor heather and grazing management. Cranberry Rough, Hockham SSSI This SSSI is a basin mire of 81.4 hectares with swamp woodland with a network of ditches and pools. The site has a generally high and stable water table and a lack of pollution means it contains an exceptionally wide range of wetland plants, butterflies and other insects. The site is owned by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust. The Natural England condition assessment states 21.6% of the area is in favourable condition with 78.4% unfavourable, recovering. 4.4 THE BROADS SAC AND RAMSAR SITE, BROADLAND SPA The Broads International Sites form an extensive network along river valleys in east Norfolk and north Suffolk. The Broads SAC is comprised of 27 component units and the SPA from 26 component units; as understood the Ramsar site is comprised of 28 component sites. Collectively the designated features cover vegetation, individual plant species, birds and other animals including invertebrates:

Aquatic vegetation. Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp.; and natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition-type vegetation.

Fen vegetation. Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae; alkaline fens; Molinia meadows on calcareous, peaty or clayey-silt-laden soils (Molinion caeruleae); transition mires and quaking bogs;

Woodland. Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae)

Plants. Fen orchid Liparis loeselii and other rare plants Animals. Otter, Desmoulin’s whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana, Anisus

vorticulus, and other invertebrates Birds. Overwintering species (pink footed goose Anser brachyrhynchus,

wigeon Anas penelope, shoveler Anas clypeata, gadwall Anas strepera, Bewick’s swan Cygnus columbianus, whooper swan Cygnus cygnus, hen harrier Circus cyaneus, great bittern Botaurus stellaris, ruff Philomachus


October 2013

33 of 44

pugnax); overwintering assemblage; breeding birds (marsh harrier Circus aeruginosus).

Four Component Units of The Broads SAC, The Broads Ramsar site and The Broadland SPA are in South Norfolk. These are all sites of Scientific Interest (SSSI):

Hardley Flood SSSI Poplar Farm Meadows, Langley SSSI Ducan’s Marsh, Claxton SSSI Yare Broads & Marshes SSSI (southern section only in South Norfolk)

Hardley Flood SSSI Hardley Flood is an area of 48 hectares of shallow lagoons and reedbeds that act as a spillway for the River Chet. Breaches in the river-bank allow tidal waters to move freely between the river and the marsh. Soft muds are exposed at low tide and these attract a range of wading birds in spring and autumn while the reedbeds support nesting wildfowl and other fenland birds, including nationally important breeding populations of Shoveler, Pochard and Gadwall. The unit is considered by Natural England to be in 100% Favourable Condition (April 1st, 2013). The maintenance of appropriate water levels is considered the most important factor in ensuring the important features of the SSSI are retained in favourable condition. Access is limited to two public footpaths at the boundaries of the site. A long-distance trail, the Wherryman Way, runs adjacent to the river. The wetness of the area precludes further public use. Poplar Farm Meadows, Langley SSSI This site is a small spring-fed calcareous fen of 7.23 hectares situated on the edge of the flood-plain of the River Yare. The meadows are exceptionally diverse and several scarce and locally uncommon plants are present. Species-rich calcareous fens are virtually confined to East Anglia and this site is an unusual example with intergrading fen grassland communities. These rich communities are maintained by light summer grazing. The surrounding dykes contain clear spring-waters and support an interesting assemblage of water-plants. The unit is considered by Natural England to be in 100% favourable condition (April 1st 2013). Grazing management is considered to be the most significant factor in ensuring the continued improvements in this site condition. The site is privately owned and there is no public access.


October 2013

34 of 44

Ducan’s Marsh, Claxton SSSI Ducan’s Marsh is situated in the valley of a small tributary of the River Yare and is one of the richest areas of unimproved, wet valley grassland now remaining in East Norfolk. Springs emerge from the valley-side and species-rich fen and fen grassland communities have developed in the seepage zones. The plant communities include several uncommon species and are maintained by a traditional management of light summer grazing. The unit is considered by Natural England to be in 100% recovering condition. The grassland has been surveyed annually since 2009 and little change has been noted in the important M13 plant community since 1986. Grazing management is considered to be the most significant factor in ensuring the continued improvements in this site condition. The site is privately owned and there is no public access. Yare Broads & Marshes SSSI This is a composite site made up of two former separate SSSIs known as Surlingham & Rockland Broads, and Strumpshaw Fen & Buckenham Marshes, with additions. Substantial areas are managed as nature reserves by the RSPB and NNT. The Yare Broads and Marshes are a nationally important wetland site consisting of extensive areas of unreclaimed fen, carr woodland, open water and grazing marsh on shallow fenland peats. The site lies in the middle reaches of the River Yare and is one of the key Broadland sites with great botanical and ornithological interest. The species-rich fens, dykes and unimproved meadows hold an outstanding assemblage of plants including many rare species. An important community of breeding birds is found or the fens and includes most of the typical Broadland species. The only regular wintering flock of bean geese in England frequent the grazing marshes at Buckenham. A Broadland speciality, the swallowtail butterfly is also present in good numbers on the site. Surlingham and Rockland Broads are the sections of the SSSI which are within the boundary of South Norfolk. Strumpshaw RSPB reserve and Buckenham Marshes are north of the River Yare (the district boundary) and access from South Norfolk to these sites is restricted to distant river crossings. Overall, 69% of the SSSI is considered by Natural England to be in favourable condition, with 14.7% in favourable recovering and just 1.7% in unfavourable and declining condition. In the section south of the river, access is limited to public rights of way and nature trails, mostly along the river bank and adjacent to Rockland Broad. In places there are boardwalks to allow access at wetter times and to protect sensitive vegetation. A long-distance trail, the Wherryman Way, runs adjacent to the site. Water skiing is permitted on the river at various points in the area.


October 2013

35 of 44

4.5 RIVER WENSUM SAC The River Wensum SAC is designated from the headwaters near Fakenham downstream to Norwich, with the designated boundary in most parts restricted to the channel and banks but including adjacent marsh and fen in some parts of the valley. The southern limit of the designation is Costessey Mill. Collectively the designated features cover vegetation, individual plant species, birds and other animals including invertebrates:

Vegetation, both aquatic and bankside. Alluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and Fraxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion, Alnion incanae, Salicion albae); calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae; and water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation.

Animals. White-clawed (or Atlantic stream) crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes; Desmoulin`s whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana; brook lamprey Lampetra planeri; and bullhead Cottus gobio.

Within South Norfolk there are six management units of the SSSI (units 38-43). Of these units, numbers 40-43 are considered by Natural England (March 1st 2013) to be in unfavourable recovering condition. These units are improving through restoration of the floodplain. Units 38-39 are considered to be in unfavourable, no change condition and the lack of improvement is due to their isolation from the river. The most significant impacts on the river quality relate to agricultural run-off whilst inappropriate grazing regimes are the most significant factors in hindering improvements in the floodplain. In the relevant reaches of the river, the floodplain grasslands are private and access is limited to public rights of way which are largely on the fringes of the SSSI. There are no formal facilities for public use in the area within South Norfolk. 4.6 WAVENEY AND LITTLE OUSE VALLEY FENS/REDGRAVE & LOPHAM RAMSAR Redgrave and Lopham Fens SSSI is a component unit of the Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens SAC and is a Ramsar site in its own right. It consists of an extensive area of spring-fed valley fen at the headwaters of the River Waveney. It supports several distinct fen vegetation types, ranging from Molinia-based grasslands, mixed sedge fen to reed-dominated fen. There are small areas of wet heath and carr woodland. The invertebrate fauna is extensive and is the only British locality for the fen raft spider Dolomedes plantarius. Desmoulins’s whorl snail Vertigo moulinsiana is present. The site has been restored in an internationally recognised restoration project, costing approximately £3.4 million.


October 2013

36 of 44

The site is owned and managed by the Suffolk Wildlife Trust. The reserve is open to the public all year round. It has an Education Centre which it uses to host family activity days, school trips and adult education courses. There is a picnic area, toilet facilities and there are three dedicated nature trails. The Natural England condition assessment states that 100.0% of the area is in unfavourable, recovering condition. 5 STAGE 1: TESTS OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 5.1 OVERVIEW Following the methodology described above, each component unit of the International Sites that are not scoped-out are subject to tests of likely significance. The Stage 1: Test of Likely Significant Effect considers disturbance in relation to:


Valley Fens SAC 5.2 SITE SPECIFIC TESTS OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS Norfolk Valley Fens Two component units are in the South Norfolk district boundary, Coston Fen, Runhall SSSI and Flordon Common SSSI. Coston Fen is a private site without public access and therefore will not be subject to disturbance issues. Flordon Common is open access but Natural England condition assessment (April 2013) the site is favourable or unfavourable recovering condition. The maintenance of water levels and a correct grazing regime are considered the most important factors in ensuring the site meets its conservation objectives and the designated features are considered to be relatively insensitive to disturbance. Furthermore, the site is only ever likely to serve local recreational needs. Therefore, it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on the Norfolk Valley Fens SAC. Breckland SPA and Breckland SAC None of the component SSSI units of the Breckland International Sites are in South Norfolk. Under the scoping criteria only the units closest to South Norfolk Boundary need to be tested for likely significant effects. The relevant units are Bridgham & Brettenham Heaths SSSI, East Wretham Heath SSSI, Stanford Training Area SSSI and Cranberry Rough, Hockham SSSI.


October 2013

37 of 44

Of these sites, the first three have breeding birds as designated features and thus disturbance is a major threat to their site integrity. However, Bridgham & Brettenham Heaths and East Wretham Heath are managed by the Norfolk Wildlife Trust which strictly enforces a no public access policy during the breeding season for stone curlew. The Stanford Training Area SSSI has a total ban on public access at all times. Most of the stone curlew breeding population occurs outside of these sites on privately owned farmland. The restriction of access in Breckland is considered highly effective in minimising disturbance to stone curlew and the population of this species in Eastern England has been increasing steadily in recent years from fewer than 100 pairs in 1985 to circa 280 pairs today (RSPB, 2013). The stone curlew was moved from the 'Birds of Conservation Concern' red list to amber list in 2009. Given the distance to these sites from settlements in South Norfolk, and the proposed 9000 new homes in Thetford, it is unlikely that site integrity will be affected by site allocations in South Norfolk. The Wymondham AAP indicates that the Wymondham will provide at least 2,200 new homes and 20 hectares of employment land. Access from Wymondham to the Breckland International Sites is reasonable, as the A11 provides a relatively direct route. The work by Dolman et al. (2008) in Breckland who undertook a survey of visitors actually using semi-natural areas as opposed to more formal tourist attractions determined that 43% of visitors were from within 5km and another 20% from 5-10km. The distance from South Wymondham to the nearest unit of the Breckland International Site (Breckland Forest SSSI/SAC at Bridgham) is in excess of 20km, and these units have no visitor facilities and the public are excluded during the breeding season for stone curlew. As such, it is considered that it is unlikely that site integrity will be affected by development in Wymondham as described in the draft Wymondham AAP. The Long Stratton AAP indicates that Long Stratton will provide at least 1,800 new homes and 12 hectares of employment land. Access from Wymondham to the Breckland International Sites is not direct; visitors would need to drive across country to Attleborough, or up the A140 and then A47 to reach the A11. The work by Dolman et al. (2008) in Breckland who undertook a survey of visitors actually using semi-natural areas as opposed to more formal tourist attractions determined that 43% of visitors were from within 5km and another 20% from 5-10km. The distance from Long Stratton to the nearest unit of the Breckland International Site (Breckland Forest SSSI/SAC at Bridgham) is in excess of 20km, and these units have no visitor facilities and the public are excluded during the breeding season for stone curlew. As such, it is considered that it is unlikely that site integrity will be affected by development in Long Stratton as described in the draft Long Stratton AAP.


October 2013

38 of 44

The Cringleford Draft Neighbourhood Development Plan indicates that 1,200 new dwellings will be allocated. This is in addition to the approved 1000 currently being delivered at Round House Park. Like Wymondham, the parish is situated on the A11 with relatively direct access to the same units of the Breckland International Site. But the distance to Breckland International Site from Cringleford is greater than that from Wymondham (>35km). As such, it is considered that it is unlikely that site integrity will be affected by development in Cringleford as described in the draft NDP. Therefore, it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on the Breckland International Sites. The Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, the Broadland SPA The Broads is a major tourism area. Its international sites are variously comprised of 28 component sites, with a diverse array of wetland and aquatic habitats. Some areas – including component sites – receive substantial numbers of visitors and are subject to both land- and water-based recreational activities. Substantial parts are, however, without public access or with access restricted to public footpaths and/or by impassable terrain. Four Component Units of The Broads SAC, The Broads Ramsar site and the Broadland SPA are in South Norfolk: Hardley Flood SSSI: Poplar Farm Meadows, Langley SSSI; Ducan’s Marsh, Claxton SSSI and Yare Broads & Marshes SSSI (southern section only in South Norfolk). Of these sites, two Poplar Farm Meadows and Ducan’s Marsh are private sites without public access and therefore will not be subject to disturbance issues. At Hardley Flood SSSI, access is limited to two public footpaths at the boundaries of the site. A long-distance trail, the Wherryman Way, runs adjacent to the river. The wetness of the area precludes further public use. The unit is considered by Natural England to be in 100% Favourable Condition and the maintenance of appropriate water levels is considered the most important factor in ensuring the important features of the SSSI are retained in favourable condition and the designated features are considered to be relatively insensitive to disturbance. As access is restricted to the perimeter of the site and a Norfolk Trail already passes the site it is considered unlikely that there would not be an impact on site integrity. Therefore it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on this component unit. The Yare Broads and Marshes SSSI is a larger unit than the other Broadland sites. The Strumpshaw RSPB reserve and Buckenham Marshes are north of the River Yare (the district boundary) and access from South Norfolk to these sites is restricted to distant river crossings. A car journey from Poringland in South Norfolk to Strumpshaw RSPB would cover a distance of 20km. It is considered


October 2013

39 of 44

that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects from recreation to be considered unlikely on these sections north of the river as a result of development in South Norfolk. Surlingham and Rockland Broads are the sections of the SSSI which are within the boundary of South Norfolk. These areas have botanical, ornithological and invertebrate interest and have some recreational opportunities, particularly water-based. The River Yare is navigable to Norwich around 5km west of the area and recreational river traffic can be heavy in summer, with public marinas and hire boat companies based in Brundall on the northern bank. Water skiing is permitted at various points of the river in the area. Land-based recreation is limited. The area includes:

Surlingham Church Marsh RSPB reserve. Access is restricted to public rights of way, mostly along the river bank with very low key infrastructure limited to a viewing shelter overlooking open water pools and limited car parking at Surlingham Church. Additional permissive paths provide pedestrian access to a riverside pub which also has public moorings. The RSPB do not promote this site, instead encouraging access to the reserves on the northern side of the river where there are more facilities.

Wheatfen Reserve (the Ted Ellis Reserve). Managed by the Ted Ellis Trust, this reserve is one of the few remaining tidal swamp fens on the River Yare. The reserve has limited facilities largely catering for naturalists and has a small car park and some waymarked paths.

Rockland Broad and marshes. Managed by the RSPB and others, there is public car parking in Rockland St. Mary’s near to pubs and public moorings at Rockland Staithe. There are no toilets or other facilities. A long-distance trail, the Wherryman Way, runs adjacent to the site on a surfaced path of a standard suitable for wheelchairs but access is not permitted elsewhere. A bird watching hide overlooking Rockland Broad can be accessed from the trail that also links other riverside pubs. Local wildfowling groups use Rockland Broad for shooting.

The nearest settlement with site allocations to the Surlingham/Rockland units of the International Site is Poringland which is approximately 10km away. This is further than the 5km used to scope-out International Sites recommended by Natural England (2006) that are unlikely to be impacted from development. Furthermore, the distance to Whitlingham Country Park is much the same, the route is easier, and the facilities more attractive. Given the limited attraction to these component units and low-key facilities and access limited to public rights of way, it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on this component unit. Taking into account the features of all four component units in South Norfolk, it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be


October 2013

40 of 44

considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on the Broads SAC and Ramsar Site, the Broadland SPA complex. River Wensum SAC There are few visitor or recreation facilities along the River Wensum. Much of the designated area is in private ownership, with restrictions on access, fishing and canoeing. Public access to water is limited to a few locations, such as an informal access point near The Swan public house in Ringland. Footpaths run along the banks for limited sections. Furthermore, the designated features are considered to be relatively insensitive to disturbance, requiring actual water-based recreation for impacts to occur. Given these restrictions on public access and its low attraction to visitors, it is considered unlikely that there would be an impact on site integrity. Therefore it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on the River Wensum SAC. Redgrave & South Lopham Fens Ramsar/ Waveney & Little Ouse Valley Fens SAC Redgrave and Lopham Fens SSSI is a component unit of the Waveney and Little Ouse Valley Fens SAC and is a Ramsar site in its own right. The reserve is open to the public all year round and has some visitor facilities including self-guided trails. The site is designated for its botanical and invertebrate features which are not considered vulnerable to disturbance. Given the distance to these sites from settlements in South Norfolk (Diss is c11km distant) and the relative lack of attractiveness to general visitors, it is unlikely that site integrity will be affected by site allocations in South Norfolk. Therefore it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on the River Wensum SAC. 5.3 SUMMARY OF STAGE 1: TESTS OF LIKELY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS As discussed earlier, in comparison to the rest of the county, the district of South Norfolk has very few international sites, and none are entirely within the district boundary. Four small component units of The Broads SAC/Broadland SPA are within South Norfolk between Surlingham and Loddon with two other very small component units near Geldeston on the District’s southern boundary. The River Wensum SAC forms the northern boundary of the district in the area near Costessey although for most of this section the SAC designation is mostly confined to the river channel rather than the wider floodplain.


October 2013

41 of 44

The following International Sites were assessed:


Valley Fens SAC Having completed the Stage 1 test, it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required for disturbance effects on any of the International Sites. As it is concluded that significant effects are unlikely there is no need to undertake further stages of the HRA process. 6. CONCLUSIONS As it is considered that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects to be considered unlikely and an Appropriate Assessment is not required there is no need to undertake further stages of the HRA process.

The HRA work for the Greater Norwich JCS (Mott Macdonald, 2010) highlighted the need for the implementation of green infrastructure developments to offset the possibility of uncertainty regarding potential in combination and cumulative effects associated with water resources and tourism (recreation) on International Sites. Although this process has demonstrated that there is sufficient confidence for significant effects from the Site Allocations Document, Wymondham AAP, Long Stratton AAP and Cringleford Neighbourhood Development Plan on International Sites to be considered unlikely, it is reasonable to take a precautionary approach. As such it is recommended that green/recreation space is required for new developments by local policies.


October 2013

42 of 44

7. REFERENCES Anglian Water, Environment Agency & Natural England (2012). Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk – Habitats Regulations Assessment Supplementary Note. Cover letter to an amended version of Mott Macdonald (2010). Bracknell Forest Council (2011) Thames Basin Heaths Special Protection Area Avoidance and Mitigation Supplementary Planning Document Appendices Broads Authority (2006) Appropriate Assessment of the Core Strategy – Submission Report. Under the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &C) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2006. September 2006. Available from: http://www.broadsauthority.gov.uk/authority/consultations/core-strategy/submission-core-strategy-dpdconsultation.Html Broads Authority (2010) Broads Boat Census. Broads Authority, Norwich. Broads Authority (2011) A Strategy and Action Plan for Sustainable Tourism in the Broads 2011 – 2015. Broads Authority, Norwich. DfCLG (2012) National Planning Policy Framework. Department for Communities and Local Government, London. Dolman, P., Lake, I. R. & Bertoncelj, I. (2008) Visitor Flow Rate and Recreational Modelling in Breckland. UEA, Norwich. Ecology Consultancy (2013) Information to inform a Habitats Regulation Assessment: North Sprowston & Old Catton. Report for Beyond Green English Nature (1999) Habitats Regulations Guidance Note. English Nature, Peterborough. English Nature (2004) European Sites Guidance. English Nature, Peterborough. European Commission (2007) Guidance Document on Article 6(4) of the ‘Habitats Directive’ 92/43/EEC. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/natura2000/management/guidance_en.htm Footprint Ecology & David Tyldesley & Associates (2012), Habitats Regulations Assessment of Great Yarmouth Local Plan Core Strategy, November 2012, Report for Great Yarmouth Borough Council Gill, J.A., Norris, K. & Sutherland, W.J. (2001a) Why behavioural responses may not reflect the population consequences of human disturbance. Biological Conservation 97, 265-268. Goss-Custard, J.D. (2008) National Cycle Network – Exe Estuary Cycleway. Update of the Appropriate Assessment of the subsections from Turf Lock to Powderham Church. Report to Devon County Council. Available from: www.devon.gov.uk/plandoc_91_3396.pdf


October 2013

43 of 44

Grant, G. (2010) Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Great Yarmouth Waterfront Area Action Plan. Further Preferred Options; October 2010. Available from: www.greatyarmouth. gov.uk/view/GYBC110690 Great Yarmouth BC (2005) Core Strategy Development Plan Document 2021. Issues and Options. Great Yarmouth Borough Council, Great Yarmouth. Great Yarmouth BC (2009) Great Yarmouth Profile. Available from: http://www.enterprisegy.co.uk/downloads/1/great_yarmouth_profile_2009%5B1%5D.pdf Hill, D., Hockin, D., Price, D. Tucker, G. Morris, R. & Treweek, J. (1997). Bird disturbance: improving the quality and utility of disturbance research. Journal of Applied Ecology 34, 275-288. Jones, A., Bateman, I. & Wright, J. (2003) Estimating Arrival Numbers and Values for Informal Recreational Use of British Woodlands. CSERGE / FC, Norwich. Kirby, J., Davidson, N., Giles, N., Owen, M. & Spray, C. (2004). Waterbirds and Wetland Recreation Handbook: A review of Issues and Management Practice. The Wildfowl & Wetlands Trust. Slimbridge. Liley, D (2008a). Development and the North Norfolk coast. Scoping Document on the Issues Relating to Access. Footprint Ecology, Dorset. Liley, D. (2008b) Little Terns at Great Yarmouth. Disturbance to birds and implications for strategic planning and development control. Unpublished report commissioned by Great Yarmouth Borough Council and the RSPB. Footprint Ecology, Wareham, Dorset. Liley, D., Hoskin, R., Lake, S. & Underhill-Day, J. (2009) Habitats Regulations Assessment of the Great Yarmouth Core Strategy. Liley, D., Hoskin, R., Underhill-Day, J. & Tyldesley, D. (2008) Habitat Regulations Assessment: Breckland Council Submission Core Strategy and Development Control Policies. Breckland District Council, Dereham. Liley, D., Jackson, D.B. & Underhill-Day, J.C. (2006) Visitor Access Patterns on the Thames Basin Heaths. English Nature, Peterborough. Mott Macdonald (2010) Habitats Regulation Assessment. Joint Core Strategy for Broadland, Norwich and South Norfolk. Greater Norwich Development Partnership, Norwich. Scott Wilson (2010) Greater Norwich Development Partnership. Stage 2b Water Cycle Study. Greater Norwich Development Partnership, Norwich. Sutherland, W.J., Armstrong-Brown, S., Armsworth, P.R., Brereton, T., Brickland, J., Campbell, C.D., Daniel E. Chamberlain, D.E., Cooke, A.L., Nicholas K. Dulvy, N.K., Dusic, N.R., Fitton, M., Freckleton, R.P.,Godfray, C., Grout, N., Harvey, H.J., Hedley, C., Hopkins, J.J., Kift, N.B., Kirby, J., Kunin, W.E., MacDonald, D.W., Marker, B., Naura, M., Neale, A.R., Oliver, T., Osborn, D., Pullin, A.S., Shardlow, M.E.A., Showler, D.A., Smith,


October 2013

44 of 44

P.L., Richard J. Smithers, R.J., jean-Luc Solandt, J.-L., Spencer, J., Spray, C.J., Thomas, C.D., Thompson, J., Webb, S.E., Yalden, D.W. & Watkinson, A.R. (2006) The identification of 100 ecological questions of high policy relevance in the UK. Journal of Applied Ecology 43, 617–627. Tyldesley, D. (2011) Assessing projects under the Habitats Directive: Guidance for Competent Authorities. Report to the Countryside Council for Wales, Bangor Wildfrontier (2011) Broads Authority Development Management Policies DPD. Appropriate Assessment (schedule of Proposed Minor Changes) – March 2011. Available at: http://www.broads-authority.gov.uk/broads/live/search.html Wildfrontier (2012) Broads Authority Draft Habitats Regulations Assessment of Site Specific Policies. Broads Authority, Norwich.