Stoke Orchard Issues Report Appendix 2 by Sd96z5

VIEWS: 5 PAGES: 14

									     Tewkesbury Borough
          Council

        Stoke Orchard Issues Report




“Helping our communities to flourish in a quality environment”

                     February 2006



                                                             1
       STOKE ORCHARD ISSUES REPORT

                      FEBRUARY 2006




1   Summary

2   Introduction

3   Constraints

4   Options

5   Assessment of Options

6   Consideration of the most appropriate use

7   Appendix 1 Planning Context




                                                2
1.0 Summary

1.1 This document aims to provide an outline of the issues and options with
regard to the Stoke Orchard Regeneration Action Area Plan (AAP). The paper
will consider the character and history of the area, constraints, issues, and set
out the planning background which will help to establish potential options for
the long term of the AAP. The relevant planning context is set out in appendix
1.

2.0 Introduction

2.1 Stoke Orchard Parish lies in the Severn Vale between Tewkesbury and
Cheltenham. The land falls gently towards the North West and is dissected by
the shallow valleys of streams which cross the vale before draining into the
Avon at Tewkesbury. Dean Brook runs through the village.

2.2The former Coal Research Establishment (CRE) lies within the built-up
boundaries of the village of Stoke Orchard. The village is located some 3km to
the west of the principal settlement of Bishops Cleeve, 6.5km North West of
the major urban centre of Cheltenham, and 5 km south east of the urban area
of Tewkesbury.

2.3 Stoke Orchard comprises around 70 dwellings divided in to two groups of
houses set either side of the CRE, which extends over an area of
approximately 9.31ha.

2.4 The CRE site was formally owned by the National Coal Board who used it
as a research establishment. While part of the front of the site at the south
east corner is in Class B1 use, the greater portion of the site is now under
used, vacant or derelict and is classed a ‘brownfield’ site.

2.5 The area of land opposite Manor Farm, Stoke Orchard is identified as an
area of important open space as it is considered to be particularly important
for its value in screening the CRE site from the road as well as for its inherent
attractive appearance.
There are also eight Grade II listed buildings and one Grade I Listed building
in the village.

2.6 There has been a high level of heavy goods vehicle traffic through the
village. Heavy goods traffic associated with the waste management
operations at Wingmoor Farm are currently prevented from routing through
the village of Stoke Orchard. For both waste operators who use the highway,
there are clear restrictions to travelling (left) through the village. These
restrictions are both physically (by virtue of the access construction for both
sites) and as a result of conditions placed on extant permissions.

2.7 In the 18th century Stoke Orchard was a small village which was mainly
agriculture with the land being divided between pasture, meadow and arable.
During the Second World War the Ministry for Aircraft Production set up a
shadow factory at what was to become the CRE site which was run by the


                                                                                  3
aircraft company at Brockworth. There were two large buildings, one for
production and one used as a flight shed. The buildings were sited here to
take advantage of the RAF Stoke Orchard Aerodrome which was located to
the South East of the Village. Given the history of the site and its contribution
towards the War it may be appropriate for any redevelopment to include a
memorial to mark this.

2.8 Since the war the aerodrome has returned to agriculture. The Ministry site
was however taken over by industrial uses. The larger site to the west of the
village was occupied by the National Coal Board (NCB) as a research station
(CRE). The site expanded under the NCB with additional buildings, structures
and the area of land to the north of Dean Brook being added between 1947
and the early 1990s.

2.9 The NCB vacated the site in the 1990s and the site is now largely
underused, vacant and derelict, and is considered to be a brownfield site as
mentioned above.
Given that historically most of those employed at the sites did not live in the
village Stoke Orchard remains a small settlement.




Map 1 – Stoke Orchard




                                                                                    4
3.0 Constraints

3.1 The following list set out the constraints for Stoke Orchard:
    Stoke Orchard is a village not containing a primary level of community
      facilities or services (e.g. schools, shops and community services and
      facilities).
    The Tewkesbury Borough Local Plan identifies the site as settlement in
      the countryside which does not have a residential development
      boundary.
    Given the history of the site CRE has established permission for
      employment use.
    To the South of the Stoke Road the land is identified as Green Belt.
      However it is noted that there is potential for new Green Belt to the
      north as set out in Draft RSS Policy SR11.
    Dean Brook runs through the village and subsequently the Environment
      Agency has identified a significant amount of land around the brook as
      being part of the high risk flood area.
    The village is served by class III roads.
    The operations carried out at the CRE site have resulted in some
      contamination of the site
    The village has poor public transport links with surrounding settlements
      containing a primary level of community facilities or services.
    Despite a weight restriction in the Stoke Orchard Village HGV traffic is
      still causing environmental problems within the village.
    There are road safety issues concerning the lack of pavements and the
      presence of children travelling to and from the school located between
      Stoke Orchard and Tredington.
    The majority of the CRE site is currently vacant and is falling into
      disrepair which is having an impact on the environment and the
      appearance of the village.
    The site is archaeologically sensitive. The County Council have
      advised that they would recommend that a condition is attached to any
      planning permission to ensure that a watching brief of any development
      is undertaken.
    There is no landscape protection designation.
    The proposed regeneration site (CRE) is located some 1600 metres
      from an existing mineral working (sand & gravel extraction at Wingmoor
      Farm, Bishop Cleeve - operated by Huntsmans Quarries Ltd and
      Grundons)
    The proposed regeneration site (CRE) is located at least 1400 metres
      from a number of existing waste management sites (current and
      permitted waste operations including: non-hazardous and hazardous
      land filling, treatment of hazardous waste prior to land filling, a
      household recycling centre (HRC), green composting and some waste
      transfer operations.) These operations are split between two operators:
      Cory Environmental Ltd and Grundons)



                                                                           5
        The proposed regeneration site (CRE) is located within at least 1400
         metres from three allocated preferred waste management sites as
         identified in the adopted Gloucestershire Waste Local Plan (WLP). The
         preferred sites are Wingmoor Farm West; Wingmoor Farm East and
         Wingmoor Farm South East.
        Wingmoor Farm as mentioned is approximately 1400 metres from
         Stoke Orchard. The site is used for mineral extraction and for land
         filling and land raising with commercial and industrial wastes which also
         includes a householder recycling centre. Planning permission has also
         been granted by Gloucestershire County Council for the erection of a
         Materials Recovery facility which includes a large industrial type
         building which would have a floor area of approximately 3850 sq.
         metres and a maximum height of 12 metres. The building will hold
         mechanical and manual systems for the sorting of waste.


4.0 Options

4.1 This section sets out a number of what are considered to be realistic
options for the redevelopment of the CRE site, these options however are not
suggested to be the only ways of developing the site and therefore the
suggestion of further options would be welcomed.

4.2 The following options are set out for the purposes of testing the impact of
different potential uses of the site. This should not be taken to imply that
these are necessarily acceptable uses for the site. They will be carefully
considered so as to allow a full and sound justification on what is considered
to be the most robust solution in the context of planning policy.

a)       Site to be promoted and allocated in the LDF as an employment site.
b)       Site to be redeveloped for housing
c)       Land to the north of Dean Brook returned to agriculture with the
         remainder to be developed as mixed use development to include
         housing, employment and facilities.
d)       Site to be allocated as a residential institution, i.e. care home.
e)       Site to be returned to agriculture and all contamination removed.

Or

f)       Site to remain unchanged.




                                                                                  6
5.0 Assessment of Options

5.1 The following paragraphs set out the options presented in section 4 setting
out the advantages and disadvantages in the context of planning policy and
the constraints of the site.

5.2 – Option A CRE to be promoted and allocated in the LDF as an
employment site and removal of contaminants from the land.
    Biodiversity – It would be difficult to ensure that the development of the
       site for employment uses and associated impact would allow the site to
       integrate with wildlife and their habitat.
    Noise – The CRE site has a B1 established use as industrial and
       therefore its continued use as such does not need planning permission.
       While any new buildings will require planning permission it could be the
       case that the use would not, and therefore it may be difficult to control
       such ancillary activities such as hours of delivery and hours of
       operation in the determination of a planning application. It is however
       noted that there are other employment uses that would require
       applications for change of use.
    Local Population - Stoke Orchard is a small village and the impact of an
       employment site would not be to the benefit of the population.
       Traditionally in small villages there would not be a large employment
       site with large industrial buildings
    Human Health - Employment uses by their nature impact on the
       surrounding environment. The redevelopment of the site with the
       removal of contamination and the erection of modern buildings would
       benefit human health, however new employment uses could impact on
       human health by way of pollutants and the fumes from delivery vehicles
       and operations.
    Soil and Geodiversity – The proposal would allow the removal of
       contamination, however continuing employment use could cause
       further contamination.
    Water – Dean Brook runs through the site, while the removal of
       contamination at the site is of benefit it is difficult to ensure that the
       watercourse would not be contaminated by employment uses.
    Air – Potential for pollution to be generated by employment use and the
       vehicle movements to and from the site.
    Climate factors – The site is isolated and is located 4.8km from the
       nearest motorway junction (junction 10 of the M5) which is not a full
       interchange, and 10.6km from the nearest full interchange junction.
       From these junctions the site is only accessible by country roads.
       Heavy goods vehicle journeys may increase.
    Material assets – A scheme of this size and nature must be
       accompanied by a waste management strategy. This statement needs
       to set out how waste arising during the demolition, construction and
       occupation of the development is to be minimised and how recycling
       during the occupational life of the development has been incorporated
       into the design, layout and site function.




                                                                               7
      Cultural heritage – Would present an opportunity to provide buildings
       designed to reflect the heritage of the village.
      Landscape – The removal of the existing unsightly buildings and
       replacing them with new appropriately designed buildings would be to
       the benefit of the landscape. However, traditionally it is not
       commonplace for there to be a large employment site in a village and
       may have an adverse visual impact on the landscape.

5.3 – Option B Site to be redeveloped for housing.
    Biodiversity – would provide an opportunity to address and improve
       integration with wildlife, would also remove the contamination.
    Noise – a housing development would create minimal noise.
    Human Health – considered to have minimal impact
    Population – use of the site for housing would be welcomed by the
       local community. Less intrusive form of development than exists at the
       site.
    Soil and geodiversity – would be improved by the removal of
       contamination.
    Water – considered to be a more appropriate use which after the
       decontamination would have minimal impact.
    Air – as per water.
    Climatic factors – The site is not located near any facilities or services
       and also has poor public transport links. A housing development would
       add to the number of journeys required by the private car and therefore
       the site is unsustainable and therefore would not reduce greenhouse
       gas emissions. The existing school is intrinsically inaccessible and car
       dependent and the view of the County Council is that it is not
       sustainable to build a 1200m, £227,000 path to it, particularly without
       guarantee of significant future use. The introduction of an improved
       regular bus link with Bishops Cleeve might help to reduce this impact.
       It is also noted that there is poor infrastructure serving the area for
       example the closed secondary schools are located in Bishops Cleeve
       and Tewkesbury.
    Material assets – please refer to the comments made on this topic in
       section 5.2.
    Cultural heritage – the removal of the existing buildings and an
       appropriately designed scheme use could be to the benefit of local
       heritage.
    Landscape – Removal of the existing buildings would be to the benefit
       of the landscape, however traditionally it would not be a characteristic
       of such a small village to have such a large housing development and
       therefore could have an impact on the landscape.

5.4 – Option C Mixed use, land to the north of Dean Brook returned to
agriculture with the remainder to be developed as a mixed use development
to include housing employment and facilities such as a shop (including post
office).




                                                                               8
      Biodiversity – Returning the land to the north of the brook to non-
       intensive agriculture would be beneficial. This option presents an
       opportunity to improve biodiversity.
      Noise – Housing would create minimal noise. The employment issues
       have been presented above, however as part of a mixed use site it
       would present an opportunity to restrict the employment uses to small
       scale units that would have a satisfactory relationship with the
       surrounding housing.
      Human health – As per noise.
      Population – Generally this would provide a less intrusive form of
       development than is currently present. The local population has
       supported the principle in the past.
      Soil and geodiversity – would be improved by the removal of
       contamination, however it is not possible to predict what impact further
       employment uses might have.
      Water – as per soil and contamination.
      Air – as per soil and contamination.
      Climatic Factors – Unsustainable location and the use would
       encourage traffic movement to and from the site. The provision of
       facilities could help to address this however it is possible that the
       development would not be large enough to support a shop with post
       office facilities. . The existing school is intrinsically inaccessible and car
       dependent and the view of the County Council is that it is not
       sustainable to build a 1200m, £227,000 path to it, particularly without
       guarantee of significant future use. The introduction of an improved
       regular bus link with Bishops Cleeve might help to reduce this impact.
       It is also noted that there is poor infrastructure serving the area for
       example the closed secondary schools are located in Bishops Cleeve
       and Tewkesbury.
      Material assets – Please refer to the comments made on this topic in
       section 5.2.
      Cultural heritage - the removal of the existing buildings and an
       appropriately designed scheme use could be to the benefit of local
       heritage.
      Landscape - Removal of the existing buildings would be to the benefit
       of the landscape with the additional benefit of the restoration of the
       open aspect of the northern part of the site, however traditionally it
       would not be a characteristic of such a small village to support such a
       housing/employment development and therefore may have an impact
       on the landscape.

5.6 – Option D Site to be allocated as a residential institution, i.e. care home.
    Biodiversity – This could have a positive impact. A residential home
       would not require the site to be developed to its maximum and
       therefore a significant proportion of the site could be returned to
       agriculture or garden land which would help integrate wildlife.
    Noise – Considered to have a minimal impact.
    Human health – Considered to have a minimal impact.




                                                                                    9
      Population – Local community view to such a use are not known. The
       use would be less intrusive that the current position and would possibly
       be to the benefit of the local community.
      Soil and geodiversity – The decontamination of the land would have a
       positive impact. The end use should also ensure that this is maintained.
      Water - Decontamination would be positive and should be maintained
       with the suggested end use.
      Air – as per water.
      Climatic Factors – The isolated location use would generate traffic
       movement to and from the site by staff, visitors and deliveries.
      Material assets – Please refer to the comments made on this topic in
       section 5.2.
      Cultural heritage – the removal of the existing buildings and an
       appropriately designed scheme could be to the benefit of local heritage.
      Landscape – As per all the options suggested the removal of the
       existing buildings would be to the benefit of the landscape subject to a
       suitably designed scheme.

5.8 – Option E CRE to be returned to non-intensive agricultural use and all
contamination removed.
5.8.1 This option would provide the most beneficial solution to the site in
relation to impact on biodiversity, noise, human health, population, soil and
geodiversity, water, air, climate factors, material assets, cultural heritage and
the landscape. This option would depend on monies being invested that
would not see any capital return; therefore it would appear that this option
would not be economically viable and therefore unlikely to happen.

5.9 – Option F CRE site to remain unchanged.
5.9.1 Please refer to the points raised in 5.2. The impact of letting the site stay
as it is would be much more harmful than promoting the site as a new
employment allocation. The site would remain in poor condition and fall further
into disrepair, which would have a seriously detrimental impact on the
landscape and character of the village. Furthermore the existing
contamination would not be addressed which would be detrimental to
biodiversity, human health, local population, soil and geodiversity, water, air,
climatic factors and cultural heritage.


6.0 Consideration of the most appropriate use
6.1 This draft (regulation 25) document is published in order to inform the
drafting of the main consultation document (under regulation 26) when the
main community involvement exercise takes place and the identification of the
preferred option for the site is made.




                                                                                10
Appendix 1




             11
Appendix 1 - Planning Context

The National planning policy background is found in PPS1, PPG3, PPS7,
PPG13 and PPG17 which . There are other PPGs and PPS relevant to the
site however these are considered to be the most relevant.

PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development - reflects the duty on regional and
local planning bodies to contribute towards sustainable development when
preparing development plans, as required by the Planning and Compulsory
Purchase Act 2004. The policies seek to ensure balance in the integrated
consideration of environmental issues alongside the need for sustainable
economic development and the aim of creating genuinely sustainable
communities.
PPS1 demonstrates the Government's commitment to achieving more
sustainable development through the reformed planning system. It provides
an important, over-arching policy framework which should help improve
people's lives and the places where they live, work and enjoy, whilst
protecting our environment and natural resources—now and in the future.

PPG3 Housing – Sets out that Local Authorities should create more
sustainable patterns of development by building in ways which exploit and
deliver accessibility by public transport to jobs, education and health facilities,
shopping, leisure and local services; concentrating most additional housing
development within urban areas; the availability of previously-developed sites
and empty or under-used buildings and their suitability for housing use; the
location and accessibility of potential development sites to jobs, shops and
services by modes other than the car, and the potential for improving such
accessibility; the capacity of existing and potential infrastructure, including
public transport, water and sewerage, other utilities and social infrastructure
(such as schools and hospitals) to absorb further development and the cost of
adding further infrastructure; the ability to build communities to support new
physical and social infrastructure and to provide sufficient demand to sustain
appropriate local services and facilities; and the physical and environmental
constraints on development of land, including, for example, the level of
contamination, stability and flood risk, taking into account that such risk may
increase as a result of climate change; Villages will only be suitable locations
for accommodating significant additional housing where:it can be
demonstrated that additional housing will support local services, such as
schools or shops, which could become unviable without some modest growth.
This may particularly be the case where the village has been identified as a
local service centre in the development plan; additional houses are needed to
meet local needs, such as affordable housing, which will help secure a mixed
and balanced community

PPS7 Sustainable development in rural areas - The key policy aims of PPS7
are to plan for and facilitate good quality, sustainable development to support
thriving rural communities and businesses, while protecting the beauty and
character of the countryside. PPS7 makes clear that local planning authorities
should plan for and support a range of economic activity in rural areas, subject



                                                                                 12
to sustainability considerations and with most new development being focused
on existing towns and villages.

PPG13 Transport – Land use planning has a key role in delivering the
Governments integrated transport strategy. By shaping the pattern of
development and influencing the location, scale, density, design and mix of
land uses, planning can help to reduce the need to travel, reduce the length of
journeys and make it safer and easier for people to access jobs, shopping,
leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking, and cycling. In rural
areas, locate most development for housing, jobs, shopping, leisure and
services in local service centres which are designated in the development
plan to act as focal points for housing, transport and other services, and
encourage better transport provision in the countryside.

PPG17 Planning for space, sport and recreation – Open spaces, sport and
recreation all underpin people's quality of life. Well designed and implemented
planning policies for open space, sport and recreation are therefore
fundamental to delivering broader Government objectives. The countryside
can provide opportunities for recreation and visitors can play an important role
in the regeneration of the economies of rural areas. Open spaces within rural
settlements and accessibility to local sports and recreational facilities
contribute to the quality of life and well being of people who live in rural areas.
Promoting more sustainable development - by ensuring that open space,
sports and recreational facilities (particularly in urban areas) are easily
accessible by walking and cycling and that more heavily used or intensive
sports and recreational facilities are planned for locations well served by
public transport.

PPS22 Renewable Energy - Planning Policy Statement 22 (PPS22) and its
Companion Guide are intended to encourage the appropriate development of
further renewable energy schemes, throughout England. This will include
schemes in urban as well as rural locations, ranging in size from the domestic
to the commercial scale. If the targets are to be met, a positive and innovative
approach will be required. The planning system can only deliver sufficient
additional renewable energy schemes to meet the shortfall if positive planning
policies are in place.
These need to be backed up by strong leadership, the integration of planning
for renewable energy with other more mainstream planning activities and
communication between planners, the renewable industry, interest groups and
the wider public.

PPG25 Development and Flood Risk - The Governments policy is to reduce
the risks to people and the developed and natural environment from flooding.
It therefore looks to local planning authorities to ensure that flood risk is
properly taken into account in the planning of developments to reduce the risk
of flooding and the damage which floods cause. This guidance sets out the
Governments policy on the positive role of planning in achieving these aims
and the lead responsibilities of local planning authorities and other bodies. It
provides guidance to planning authorities, developers, the public and the
Environment Agency on a wide range of planning and other measures so that


                                                                                13
decisions on plans and applications in areas of both existing and future
development take full account of flood risk, whether inland or on the coast.




                                                                               14

								
To top