MM/102

Showing comments and forms 1 to 1 of 1

Object

Main Modifications to the North East Derbyshire Local Plan (Publication Draft), 2020

Representation ID: 10333

Received: 12/01/2021

Respondent: Wingerworth Parish Council

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Representation:

Council Officer has identified Modification reference.

Figure 8.2: A definition or description of Areas of Multiple Environmental Sensitivity ‘AMES’ primary and secondary areas is required.

Full text:

The Council have reviewed the modifications proposed to the NEDDC Local Plan with a specific focus on the potential implications for the area within the boundaries of Wingerworth Ward.

Certain statements in the Plan need noting to understand the changes proposed, and REVIEWERS COMMENTS may suggest clarification required and/or further modification

GENERAL
1. Development will be centred on Level/Tier 1 settlements/towns of Clay Cross, Eckington, Dronfield and Killamarsh
2. Local plan will make provision for 6600 new dwellings between 2014 and 2034
3. New housing development will focus on the four Tier 1 towns and the ‘strategic sites’ of The Avenue and Bywaters (NB notes on focus on other areas are deleted in the modified version)

REVIEWERS COMMENT: -(Ref MM/011 Page 44 Policy 4.40-4.43 The Avenue) Page 9 of the draft modifications plan states “…the Avenue site is located to the east of the A61, ‘adjacent to’ Wingerworth and close to the administrative boundary with Chesterfield Borough…” .
This is confusing. Is the Avenue in Wingerworth or is it not? Whilst not stated, Is a boundary change implicit in the Plan?

HOUSING STRATEGY – this is an area of concern for Wingerworth. The new figures seem in part to be a mathematical construct shifting development from Tier 1 (towns) to other areas (large villages and other settlements). This appears to have massively impacted on Wingerworth while other issues such as facilities and economic aspects are still focused on Tier 1
The proposals for the number of houses in the District are as follows:
Level 1 towns (was 2024) – reduced to 1540 representing a 24% drop
Level 2 villages (was 1917) – increased to 1960 representing a 2% increase EXCEPT for Wingerworth. The figure for Wingerworth (was 600) – increased to 752 representing an increase of 25%.

REVIEWERS COMMENT- Pages 12 700 homes are planned up to 2034 but the overall target for the Avenue is up to 1100 homes (Ref MM/012 Page 49 Policy SS3 The Avenue). Altogether the plan includes 1,483 new homes in Wingerworth (Page 9 MM/010 Page 43 Table 4.3 Housing Distribution by Level 1 and Level 2 Settlements).

REVIEWERS COMMENT - APPENDIX B -The table of required housing provision seems to indicate that Wingerworth, through building since 2014 and those applications already with provisional permission, has met its allocation already BUT this needs to be confirmed.
The figure for other settlements (was 539) – increased to 903 an increase of 68%.

The figure for the strategic Avenue site (was 716) increased to 731.

The Bywater site is now 825 – (no previous figure).

REVIEWERS COMMENT Given housing density in plan of 30 houses per hectare (HA), the proposed loss of land for housing excluding the avenue equates to 25 HA - a loss of yet 5 more ha of land.

Affordable Housing (page 78) The statement that in high value areas (relevant to Wingerworth) AT LEAST 30% of housing should be affordable removing AT LEAST – also states a number of new reasons why this figure might be reduced.

Added that housing for rent should also be included.

POLICY SS9 DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTRYSIDE)
P21, Para 1: The report refers to ….‘very special circumstances’.

REVIEWERS COMMENT - This vague statement needs to be clarified.

REVIEWERS COMMENTS P22, Para f -The meaning of the amendment is unclear. (Policy MM/019 Page 58)

SS11 / LOCAL SETTLEMENT GAPS

Added gaps must not only maintain the functionality but also the undeveloped character of the local settlement gap

Added DO NOT RESULT IN
a) coalescence of historical settlement or b) erosion of settlement separation and identity created by the undeveloped character of these spaces

The phrase where benefits might outweigh disadvantages has been removed – (strengthens statement).

REVIEWERS COMMENT- Reflected in recent planning appeal – (land to rear of 263 Nethermoor Road). This should maintain many of the boundary areas of Wingerworth but may result in a focus by developers on the areas south of New Road and Swathwick Lane.)

Gypsy Sites Page 88

Few changes are proposed to the Plan as drafted except new emphasis on small sites (2-4 pitches).

MM/12 SS3 EMPLOYMENT STRATEGY
The focus is on strengthening The Avenue and Bywater sites together with Markham Vale.
Added policies will support and enhance Level 1 towns – also maintain the role of settlements by supporting their ability to sustain services and facilities.

REVIEWERS COMMENTS The wording on page 12 needs clarification. It states that an additional four hectares (HA) of employment land will be provided. Additional to what? Is this in addition to the proposed five HA (approx.) OR has the land for employment been reduced from five to four HA?

There is now no indication of type of use – supposedly to allow flexibility.

MM /012 PAGE 46 POLICY SS3 THE AVENUE) RETAIL
A general statement that small scale retail serving day to day needs of local communities will be permitted. Words ADDED “loss of shops will be resisted” Page 9 and 11

REVIEWERS COMMENTS The inclusion of shops and so on, as permitted development on the Avenue site is welcome.

TOURISM

REVIEWERS COMMENT It might be would be difficult to resist development of caravan, camping, lodges etc. if plan shows them well concealed.

TRANSPORT STRATEGY
Relevance for Wingerworth with rewording:
‘wherever possible (developments) must facilitate access to public transport’
A change in emphasis here with emphasis on planners refusing rather than developers proving
‘can only be refused on transport grounds if there would be an unacceptable impact on highway safety or the residual cumulative impacts on road network would be severe.’

Page 11 The draft modifications plan states that as part of a new infrastructure set out in the Local Transport Plan, yet there is no determined route for the construction of a link road between the A61 and the A617 to remove the congestion resulting from the mixed-use Avenue site away from the A61. There will be no funding for the construction of this new road until 2024 at the earliest but development of the site must not prejudice the construction of this road. (Ref MM/011 Page 44 Policy 4.40-4.43 The Avenue)

REVIEWERS COMMENTS – 1) If no route has been determined by DCC how can it be known whether the ongoing ‘mixed use’ development plans prejudices it? 2) In the interim, the scale of development on the Avenue is likely to increase traffic movements and the numbers of commercial traffic on the A61 and through the Adlington Estate exponentially.

EDUCATION
There is no mention of a provision for an education site on the Avenue site.

FINANCIAL PROVISION FROM DEVELOPERS
Whole section has been re-written.

DEFINITIONS REQUIRED
Page 137 Annex 3 -Figure 8.2: A definition or description of Areas of Multiple Environmental Sensitivity ‘AMES’ primary and secondary areas is required.