Doncaster Unitary Development PlanReview 2001-2016

KEY ISSUES

Strategic Planning PolicyDirectorate of Borough Strategy and Development

cover.qxd 19/02/03 16:32 Page 2

DONCASTER BOROUGH - Key Facts & Figures

Doncaster Borough covers 226 square miles and is the largest metropolitan borough in the country by area. 67% of the land is in agricultural use. The countryside in the western ‘half’ of the Borough is Green Belt.

The 2001 Borough population is 286,900; it has fallen by 1.4% since 1981 but this is a smaller rate of

decline than elsewhere in South Yorkshire. A major element of housing need is generated by falling

household size which has decreased from a national average of 2.7 in 1981 to its current rate of 2.3.

In 2001/02 Doncaster Council received 2241 planning applications of which 103 were for major

development.

Housing

More than 5000 new homes have been built in Doncaster over the last five years.42% of these have been

built on brownfield land. As at 1st April 2002 planning permissions existed sufficient for 1741 houses.

House prices in Doncaster rose faster in 2001 than anywhere else in the country but the Borough also

contains areas of poor housing and housing market failure; some areas have been included in the

Government’s recent Housing Market Renewal Scheme.

Waste

In 1999/2000 800,000 tonnes of controlled waste was deposited in landfill sites in Doncaster; 40% of

this was household waste; the rate nationally is 15%. Waste streams from mining, quarrying and agriculture

is excluded from this figure.

Continued on inside back cover

cover.qxd 19/02/03 16:33 Page 3

Employment

Over the last five years 849,000 sq metres of employment floor space has been occupied with 14,149 jobs

created and £361million invested in Doncaster. There are currently 483 hectares of vacant land desginated

for employment purposes

Unemployment in the Borough is currently 4969, a rate of 4.3% (UK rate 3%). The Borough contains a

substantial low wage economy and pockets of high unemployment and social deprivation but now benefits

from European Objective 1 status.

Built Heritage

Doncaster has a very diverse settlement pattern with urban and suburban areas, mining and market towns,

agricultural and dormitory villages, hamlets and farmsteads with a huge variety of building types

representing a succession of styles from medieval to modern. There are 41 Conservation Areas,

approximately 800 Listed Buildings and 48 Scheduled Ancient Monuments.

Natural Heritage

There are 15 Sites of Special Scientific Interest and approximately 300 sites of local nature

conservation interest. Thorne and Hatfield Moors are of international importance. 300 Tree Preservation

Orders cover a large number of individual trees and woodlands and there are 2290 kilometres of

hedgerows including many ancient hedgerows.

Transport

Major transport proposals include a new international airport at Finningley, a road–rail interchange in

Doncaster town centre, and dualling of White Rose Way. M18 link roads to serve Rossington, Hatfield and

Finningley Airport are also under consideration.

Minerals

Doncaster has very substantial deposits of limestone, sand and gravel, coal and peat all of which have

been worked for many years. Natural gas and recently coalmine methane is also exploited. Peat extraction

on Thorne and Hatfield Moors is to cease in recognition of their international importance for nature

conservation.

Shopping

Doncaster town Centre contains approximately 1 million square feet of shopping floorspace. The

proposed Interchange scheme will add 300,000 sq ft of shopping space in the form of an extension to the

Frenchgate Shopping Centre.

Greenspace

Doncaster has 21 parks covering 200 hectares; (and attracting 21 million visits a year) and

approximately 1000 other green spaces including amenity areas, allotments and play areas. Generally there

is an undersupply of Greenspace when assessed against national standards and a general lack of quality

facilities.

DONCASTER BOROUGH - Key Facts & Figures continued...

cover.qxd 19/02/03 16:33 Page 4

Contents

1

CONTENTS PAGE

Foreword 3

1. Introduction 4

2. Future Development Strategy 8

3. Economy and Employment 14

4. Housing 19

5. Retail and Town Centres 29

6. Built Environment and Design 38

7. Mixed Use Developments 43

8. Countryside and Rural Communities 45

9. Recreation and Greenspace 52

10. Transport 58

11. Minerals 69

12. Waste 73

13. Other issues 76

14. Sustainablity Appraisal 82

15. Consultation Strategy 83

16. List of Supporting Documents 86

2

Foreword

3

Doncaster’s first Unitary Development Plan was adopted in June 1998. This was the first BoroughWide plan setting out a comprehensive framework of planning policies and proposals for land usein Doncaster. They set out the land use strategy to help rebuild the local economy and communities of Doncaster, badly affected by earlier economic restructuring. It set out to achieveeconomic and environmental regeneration, and reduce social inequalities.

Much of what the first UDP set out has now been achieved, with much development having takenplace, and important aspects of our environment protected and enhanced.

Since the UDP was adopted however, many important changes have occurred. South Yorkshirenow has Objective 1 status, Regional Planning Guidance for Yorkshire and the Humber has beenapproved by the Secretary of State, and Doncaster has prepared a Borough Strategy setting out avision and major transformational goals to revitalise Doncaster’s future.

The Council understands the importance of an up to date and relevant Development Plan and theneed for local communities and businesses to be involved in its preparation and content. Thisspatial strategy for the Borough will form an important element of the Council’s drive to achieveit’s Transformational Goals set out in the Borough Strategy.

Therefore I am pleased to invite you to participate at this initial stage of preparing the Review ofthe UDP. This Issues Report sets out the main Issues that are considered to face the Borough,and that need to be tackled in this review. This Report is not the next Plan, but is designed to giveyou the opportunity to have your views made known at the outset, and prompt a debate about themost important questions facing us, that need to be answered in the reviewed Plan.

The next stage after this debate should see an Initial Draft Plan published in early 2004.

Please help us and participate in the future planning of your area, and help the Council and all inDoncaster to achieve their full potential.

Councillor John Hoare Cabinet Member and Portfolio Holder for Urban Renaissance and Transport

4 5

1. Introduction

WHAT IS THE DONCASTER UDP... and whydo we need another one?

2002 saw the publication of The DoncasterBorough Strategy; it sets out an exciting andambitious vision for the future of the Borough;prepared by Doncaster Strategic Partnership, itproposes amongst other things:

● An urban renaissance with higher quality development and more use of brownfield land rather than Greenfield land;

● A high growth economy with rising retail, commercial, cultural and leisure opportunities;

● Increasing resident and visitor numbers;

● Widespread improvements in quality of life with particular attention to disadvantaged areas;

● The fastest growing regional airport in the north of England with a range of direct and related employment opportunities

● A more diverse and more accessible rural and natural environment;

● More efficient use of natural resources with less waste and pollution

● A significant shift from car use to other forms of transport in both urban and rural areas

● A more sustainable Borough with Doncaster exceeding all major national targets for sustainability

The Doncaster Unitary Development Plan (UDP)will play a key role in helping to achieve thisvision. The UDP is the Borough’s statutorydevelopment plan. It sets down the strategicand local planning policies necessary to guideand coordinate land use and development,contains the policies necessary to protect thebuilt and natural heritage, forms the basis fordetermining planning applications and providesthe Borough Strategy with a spatial framework.

What should this spatial framework look like?The Council is seeking the views of anyonewith an interest in the Borough on the keyissues about the scale and location and formof new development in the Borough and howbest to protect and improve the local environment.

The current UDP covered the period 1986 to2001 (although it provided for some development requirements including housingand employment land well beyond this period);consequently it needs to be reviewed inorder to provide a planning and land useframework for Doncaster for the new plan period up to 2016.

The UDP Review is required to deal with a widerange of planning and land use issues; it needsto:

● Decide where to allocate land for Doncaster’s new housing requirement.

● Determine the scale and location of new employment sites

● Safeguard sites required for other uses such as shopping or community facilities

● Consider whether existing allocations which have not yet had planning permission can and should be replaced with alternative, more sustainable, sites.

● Include policies to protect the Green Belt, other areas of countryside, urban greenspace, conservation areas, listed buildings, trees, woodlands, and wildlife habitats.

● Include policies and proposals to protect and promote Town and District Centres

● Ensure that new development is of a high quality and contributes to the requirements of local communities

● Above all, policies and proposals must form part of a strategy which will ensure that Doncaster develops as a more environmentally, economically and socially sustainable Borough over the nextfifteen years. In parallel with the preparation of the UDP a Sustainability Appraisal will be prepared which will assess how sustainable the policies and proposals of the UDP are at each stage inthe process. Further detail is provided at the back of this document.

Since the current UDP was prepared in theearly 1990s however Doncaster has seen manychanges in social, economic and environmen-tal circumstances which have been reflected inthe Borough Strategy and which require a freshlook at the Borough’s planning framework:

● National planning guidance has changed significantly with a much greater emphasis on urban renaissance, minimising the need to travel, and on sustainable and quality development which uses brownfield land and avoids areas liable to flood.

● Regional Planning Guidance has now been introduced; this applies national guidance at a more local level and applies specific targets to Doncaster including the number of new houses to bebuilt and the percentage to be built on brownfield land.

● The Council now has a new political system with a Mayor and Cabinet and produces a number of Other Borough-wide strategies which the UDP Review willneed to complement; apart from the Borough Strategy these include the Housing Strategy, Greenspace Strategy and Local Transport Plan.

● A number of communities are now producing Local Action Plans for their areas. These have to have regard to national and regional planning guidance and are likely to include policies and proposals which fall within the remit of theUDP Review.

1. Introduction

4 5

1. Introduction

WHAT IS THE DONCASTER UDP... and whydo we need another one?

2002 saw the publication of The DoncasterBorough Strategy; it sets out an exciting andambitious vision for the future of the Borough;prepared by Doncaster Strategic Partnership, itproposes amongst other things:

● An urban renaissance with higher quality development and more use of brownfield land rather than Greenfield land;

● A high growth economy with rising retail, commercial, cultural and leisure opportunities;

● Increasing resident and visitor numbers;

● Widespread improvements in quality of life with particular attention to disadvantaged areas;

● The fastest growing regional airport in the north of England with a range of direct and related employment opportunities

● A more diverse and more accessible rural and natural environment;

● More efficient use of natural resources with less waste and pollution

● A significant shift from car use to other forms of transport in both urban and rural areas

● A more sustainable Borough with Doncaster exceeding all major national targets for sustainability

The Doncaster Unitary Development Plan (UDP)will play a key role in helping to achieve thisvision. The UDP is the Borough’s statutorydevelopment plan. It sets down the strategicand local planning policies necessary to guideand coordinate land use and development,contains the policies necessary to protect thebuilt and natural heritage, forms the basis fordetermining planning applications and providesthe Borough Strategy with a spatial framework.

What should this spatial framework look like?The Council is seeking the views of anyonewith an interest in the Borough on the keyissues about the scale and location and formof new development in the Borough and howbest to protect and improve the local environment.

The current UDP covered the period 1986 to2001 (although it provided for some development requirements including housingand employment land well beyond this period);consequently it needs to be reviewed inorder to provide a planning and land useframework for Doncaster for the new plan period up to 2016.

The UDP Review is required to deal with a widerange of planning and land use issues; it needsto:

● Decide where to allocate land for Doncaster’s new housing requirement.

● Determine the scale and location of new employment sites

● Safeguard sites required for other uses such as shopping or community facilities

● Consider whether existing allocations which have not yet had planning permission can and should be replaced with alternative, more sustainable, sites.

● Include policies to protect the Green Belt, other areas of countryside, urban greenspace, conservation areas, listed buildings, trees, woodlands, and wildlife habitats.

● Include policies and proposals to protect and promote Town and District Centres

● Ensure that new development is of a high quality and contributes to the requirements of local communities

● Above all, policies and proposals must form part of a strategy which will ensure that Doncaster develops as a more environmentally, economically and socially sustainable Borough over the nextfifteen years. In parallel with the preparation of the UDP a Sustainability Appraisal will be prepared which will assess how sustainable the policies and proposals of the UDP are at each stage inthe process. Further detail is provided at the back of this document.

Since the current UDP was prepared in theearly 1990s however Doncaster has seen manychanges in social, economic and environmen-tal circumstances which have been reflected inthe Borough Strategy and which require a freshlook at the Borough’s planning framework:

● National planning guidance has changed significantly with a much greater emphasis on urban renaissance, minimising the need to travel, and on sustainable and quality development which uses brownfield land and avoids areas liable to flood.

● Regional Planning Guidance has now been introduced; this applies national guidance at a more local level and applies specific targets to Doncaster including the number of new houses to bebuilt and the percentage to be built on brownfield land.

● The Council now has a new political system with a Mayor and Cabinet and produces a number of Other Borough-wide strategies which the UDP Review willneed to complement; apart from the Borough Strategy these include the Housing Strategy, Greenspace Strategy and Local Transport Plan.

● A number of communities are now producing Local Action Plans for their areas. These have to have regard to national and regional planning guidance and are likely to include policies and proposals which fall within the remit of theUDP Review.

1. Introduction

1. Introduction 1. Introduction

76

● Doncaster along with the rest of South Yorkshire now benefits from European Objective1 status (the highest level of European funding); the M18 corridor, Dearne Corridor and Doncaster Urban Centre have been identified as funding priorities with Integrated Development Plans (IDPS) put in place; these are not land use policy plans but will be influential in terms of new allocations.

● A series of major transformational projects are at various stages of planning or implementation including The Doncaster Interchange, Doncaster Waterfront, The New Community Stadium, The New Performance Venue, the restoration and redevelopment of the former colliery sites (Bentley, Brodsworth, Askern, Edlington and Armthorpe), Doncaster Lakeside, The Town Moor Racecourse & Conference Redevelopment, the on-going Doncaster Town Centre Quality Streets Programme, and perhaps most significantly the proposed International Airport at Finningley.

The Doncaster UDP Review needs to take account of these and many other factors in producinga spatial framework which will maximise the potential of the Borough in economic, social andenvironmental terms. As with the preparation of all development plans however the UDP Reviewwill involve making some difficult choices about development and other use of land; planning isby its very nature a process which tends to generate controversy; most significant development orland use proposals tend to divide opinion. The process for the preparation of the UDP Review istherefore of crucial importance.

WHAT IS THE UDP REVIEW PROCESS... and how can I register my views?

The process for preparing the UDP Review through its various stages up to its Adoption is verymuch an open one with a number of opportunities for members of the public, community groups,environmental and other interest groups, development interests, service and utility providers andothers to have their say. The first opportunity for comment on the Review is NOW. This Key Issuesstage is an opportunity to influence the content of the UDP Review before the Council producesthe first draft plan.

To assist people to make comments The Council has produced this Key Issues Report whichhighlights some of the more significant, and perhaps inevitably controversial, choices aboutdevelopment and land use which the UDP Review will need to address. It also sets out some ofthe factors which the Council will be obliged to consider in formulating the policies and proposalsof the new UDP; these include relevant national and regional guidance, current UDP policy, theexisting situation (including where relevant some key facts and figures), and so on.

You may of course wish to suggest that theReview takes account of other issues notreferred to in the Key Issues Report. It is anticipated that many of the general policies of the current UDP (for example thosewhich safeguard the Green Belt) will not needmuch change; nevertheless this is a completereview and people are invited to make comments on any development planningissues.

All comments received will be reported to theCouncil’s Cabinet and taken into account inpreparing the Initial Deposit Plan. This Plan willset out the Council’s draft planning policiesand proposals and include Proposals Mapswhich will show in detail how these affect thedifferent parts of the Borough. Formal objections to this plan will be taken intoaccount in the preparation of a RevisedDeposit Plan; any objections to this will be considered at a Public Local Inquiry presidedover by an independent Inspector. The Councilis generally obliged to amend the final AdoptedPlan in line with the Inspector’s recommendations. It is widely acknowledgedthat this is usually an overly long and complexprocess and the Government is likely to amendplanning legislation in the near future to changethis process. The Council will publish regularnews bulletins detailing each successive stagein the process. The Consultation Strategy andReview Process is set out in more detail at theback of this document.

Please use the Response Form to set downyour comments on the UDP Review Issues andeither post them to us (FREEPOST) or takethem to your local library or Council office.Alternatively you can e-mail comments to us atUDP@doncaster .gov.uk

IS THERE ANYONE I CAN TALK TO?

It is anticipated that as part of the consultationstrategy there will be many meetings with inter-ested parties and presentations to communityforums and so on. If you wish to talk directly toa planning officer working on the UDP Reviewthe telephone contacts are as follows:

Bob Wallens (01302) 734934Overview, Strategy and Procedures, Economy

Richard Mckone (01302) 734893Housing, Countryside, Recreation

Jane Stimpson (01302) 734886Town Centres, Retail, Urban Potential

Jeff Prior (01302) 734887Built Heritage & Design, Mixed Use

Nick Ward (01302) 734888Transport, Other Issues

Nicola Jones (01302) 734939Sustainability Appraisal, Consultation Strategy

Arthur Doyle (01302) 734460Minerals & Waste

UDP Hotline (01302) 735199(24 Hours)

1. Introduction 1. Introduction

76

● Doncaster along with the rest of South Yorkshire now benefits from European Objective1 status (the highest level of European funding); the M18 corridor, Dearne Corridor and Doncaster Urban Centre have been identified as funding priorities with Integrated Development Plans (IDPS) put in place; these are not land use policy plans but will be influential in terms of new allocations.

● A series of major transformational projects are at various stages of planning or implementation including The Doncaster Interchange, Doncaster Waterfront, The New Community Stadium, The New Performance Venue, the restoration and redevelopment of the former colliery sites (Bentley, Brodsworth, Askern, Edlington and Armthorpe), Doncaster Lakeside, The Town Moor Racecourse & Conference Redevelopment, the on-going Doncaster Town Centre Quality Streets Programme, and perhaps most significantly the proposed International Airport at Finningley.

The Doncaster UDP Review needs to take account of these and many other factors in producinga spatial framework which will maximise the potential of the Borough in economic, social andenvironmental terms. As with the preparation of all development plans however the UDP Reviewwill involve making some difficult choices about development and other use of land; planning isby its very nature a process which tends to generate controversy; most significant development orland use proposals tend to divide opinion. The process for the preparation of the UDP Review istherefore of crucial importance.

WHAT IS THE UDP REVIEW PROCESS... and how can I register my views?

The process for preparing the UDP Review through its various stages up to its Adoption is verymuch an open one with a number of opportunities for members of the public, community groups,environmental and other interest groups, development interests, service and utility providers andothers to have their say. The first opportunity for comment on the Review is NOW. This Key Issuesstage is an opportunity to influence the content of the UDP Review before the Council producesthe first draft plan.

To assist people to make comments The Council has produced this Key Issues Report whichhighlights some of the more significant, and perhaps inevitably controversial, choices aboutdevelopment and land use which the UDP Review will need to address. It also sets out some ofthe factors which the Council will be obliged to consider in formulating the policies and proposalsof the new UDP; these include relevant national and regional guidance, current UDP policy, theexisting situation (including where relevant some key facts and figures), and so on.

You may of course wish to suggest that theReview takes account of other issues notreferred to in the Key Issues Report. It is anticipated that many of the general policies of the current UDP (for example thosewhich safeguard the Green Belt) will not needmuch change; nevertheless this is a completereview and people are invited to make comments on any development planningissues.

All comments received will be reported to theCouncil’s Cabinet and taken into account inpreparing the Initial Deposit Plan. This Plan willset out the Council’s draft planning policiesand proposals and include Proposals Mapswhich will show in detail how these affect thedifferent parts of the Borough. Formal objections to this plan will be taken intoaccount in the preparation of a RevisedDeposit Plan; any objections to this will be considered at a Public Local Inquiry presidedover by an independent Inspector. The Councilis generally obliged to amend the final AdoptedPlan in line with the Inspector’s recommendations. It is widely acknowledgedthat this is usually an overly long and complexprocess and the Government is likely to amendplanning legislation in the near future to changethis process. The Council will publish regularnews bulletins detailing each successive stagein the process. The Consultation Strategy andReview Process is set out in more detail at theback of this document.

Please use the Response Form to set downyour comments on the UDP Review Issues andeither post them to us (FREEPOST) or takethem to your local library or Council office.Alternatively you can e-mail comments to us atUDP@doncaster .gov.uk

IS THERE ANYONE I CAN TALK TO?

It is anticipated that as part of the consultationstrategy there will be many meetings with inter-ested parties and presentations to communityforums and so on. If you wish to talk directly toa planning officer working on the UDP Reviewthe telephone contacts are as follows:

Bob Wallens (01302) 734934Overview, Strategy and Procedures, Economy

Richard Mckone (01302) 734893Housing, Countryside, Recreation

Jane Stimpson (01302) 734886Town Centres, Retail, Urban Potential

Jeff Prior (01302) 734887Built Heritage & Design, Mixed Use

Nick Ward (01302) 734888Transport, Other Issues

Nicola Jones (01302) 734939Sustainability Appraisal, Consultation Strategy

Arthur Doyle (01302) 734460Minerals & Waste

UDP Hotline (01302) 735199(24 Hours)

8 9

INTRODUCTION

The three fundamental objectives of the currentUDP "Economic Regeneration", "EnvironmentalImprovement" and "Reduction In SocialInequalities" are still relevant even though considerable progress has been made over thelast ten years towards meeting these objectives. Since the current UDP was prepared in the early 1990s however Doncasterhas seen many changes in social, economicand environmental circumstances whichrequire a fresh look at the Borough’s planningframework

National planning guidance has changed significantly with a much greater emphasis onurban renaissance, minimising the need to travel, and on sustainable and quality develop-ment which uses brownfield land and avoidsareas liable to flood.

Regional Planning Guidance has now beenintroduced; this applies national guidance at amore local level and applies specific targets toDoncaster including the number of new housesto be built and the percentage to be built onbrownfield land.

The Council now has a new political systemwith a Mayor and Cabinet and produces anumber of other Borough-wide strategies whichthe UDP Review will need to complementincluding the Community Strategy, LocalTransport Plan, Housing Strategy andGreenspace Strategy.

Doncaster along with the rest of SouthYorkshire now benefits from EuropeanObjective1 status (the highest level ofEuropean funding).

A series of major transformational projects areat various stages of planning or implementationincluding The Doncaster Interchange,Doncaster Waterfront, The New CommunityStadium, The New Performance Venue, therestoration and redevelopment of the formercolliery sites (Bentley, Brodsworth, Askern,Edlington and Armthorpe), Doncaster Lakeside,The Town Moor Racecourse & ConferenceRedevelopment, the on-going Doncaster TownCentre Quality Streets Programme, and perhaps most significantly the proposedInternational Airport at Finningley.

THE BOROUGH STRATEGY

The Borough Strategy for Doncaster up to 2010sets a Vision for the Borough:-

‘By 2010 Doncaster will be a major contributorto regional and national prosperity. TheBorough will enjoy a high growth economy,supported by a substantial increase in educational attainment, the consolidation ofcommercial strength and widespread improvements in quality of life. Our communi-ties will be safer, vibrant and sustainable andDoncaster will be able to offer everyone livingand working here the opportunity to achievetheir full potential.’

To achieve the vision set out in the BoroughStrategy, seven transformational goals havebeen identified.

To a varying extent, the achievement of theseven T-Goals relies on a spatial dimensionwhich relies on appropriate land use policiesand development allocations being establishedto enable their implementation. The transformational goals to be achieved by2010 are as follows:-

1. No part of the Borough is in the bottom10 per cent of wards nationally, as measured by the local deprivation index.To achieve this all areas of the Borough needimproved access to employment and skills toraise household income. Equally improvementsin health, community safety, housing, and community cohesion need to be made. TheSpatial Strategy will not only need to ensurethat there is sufficient land identified in suitablelocations for employment purposes, but alsothat all local communities have access to jobscreated.

2. The attainment of Doncaster students atKey Stage 4 at least matches the nationalaverage. To achieve this learning needs to bevalued and supported through a variety ofmethods with improved school support and animproved learning environment in the homeand activities outside school hours. The spatialstrategy will need to ensure that developmentneeds for educational establishments areaccommodated and that facilities exist to support lifelong learning in its widest sense.

3. Every household in the Doncaster areahas access to ICT facilities and services,and has the skills to use these at work, athome or at leisure. The spatial strategy willhave an influence in ensuring that new devel-opment is located in areas offering relativelyeasy opportunities to build in high quality ITinfrastructure.

4. Doncaster town is achieving an UrbanRenaissance of increasing resident andvisitor numbers, and rising retail, commercial and leisure values at ratescomparable to those of leading urbanareas in the North. To achieve this, it will benecessary for the delivery of high quality devel-opment and the attraction of new facilities andopportunities for town centres through theencouragement of urban living through highquality, safe and accessible housing and relat-ed facilities. The spatial strategy has a funda-mental role in achieving an Urban Renaissancethrough promoting appropriate developmentand setting high standards through policies fornew development.

5.The Borough is experiencing vigorous democratic renewal and communityengagement in civic and civil society, evident not just from increases in turnoutat elections but also by a significantgrowth in involvement in decision makingat all levels. The process for reviewing theUDP will encourage community involvementand participation in setting the spatial strate-gy for Doncaster.

6. All citizens will be able to appreciateDoncaster’s rural dimension and value it’s natural environment. Doncaster will exceedall major national targets for sustainability.To achieve this the Borough will aim for efficientuse of natural resources, producing less wasteand pollution, improving access between urbanareas and an increasingly diverse natural environment. The UDP Review will maintainexisting policies aimed at protecting the naturalenvironment and promote public access to thecountryside. It will contain relevant policies tosupport sustainable development.

2. Future Development Strategy

8 9

INTRODUCTION

The three fundamental objectives of the currentUDP "Economic Regeneration", "EnvironmentalImprovement" and "Reduction In SocialInequalities" are still relevant even though considerable progress has been made over thelast ten years towards meeting these objectives. Since the current UDP was prepared in the early 1990s however Doncasterhas seen many changes in social, economicand environmental circumstances whichrequire a fresh look at the Borough’s planningframework

National planning guidance has changed significantly with a much greater emphasis onurban renaissance, minimising the need to travel, and on sustainable and quality develop-ment which uses brownfield land and avoidsareas liable to flood.

Regional Planning Guidance has now beenintroduced; this applies national guidance at amore local level and applies specific targets toDoncaster including the number of new housesto be built and the percentage to be built onbrownfield land.

The Council now has a new political systemwith a Mayor and Cabinet and produces anumber of other Borough-wide strategies whichthe UDP Review will need to complementincluding the Community Strategy, LocalTransport Plan, Housing Strategy andGreenspace Strategy.

Doncaster along with the rest of SouthYorkshire now benefits from EuropeanObjective1 status (the highest level ofEuropean funding).

A series of major transformational projects areat various stages of planning or implementationincluding The Doncaster Interchange,Doncaster Waterfront, The New CommunityStadium, The New Performance Venue, therestoration and redevelopment of the formercolliery sites (Bentley, Brodsworth, Askern,Edlington and Armthorpe), Doncaster Lakeside,The Town Moor Racecourse & ConferenceRedevelopment, the on-going Doncaster TownCentre Quality Streets Programme, and perhaps most significantly the proposedInternational Airport at Finningley.

THE BOROUGH STRATEGY

The Borough Strategy for Doncaster up to 2010sets a Vision for the Borough:-

‘By 2010 Doncaster will be a major contributorto regional and national prosperity. TheBorough will enjoy a high growth economy,supported by a substantial increase in educational attainment, the consolidation ofcommercial strength and widespread improvements in quality of life. Our communi-ties will be safer, vibrant and sustainable andDoncaster will be able to offer everyone livingand working here the opportunity to achievetheir full potential.’

To achieve the vision set out in the BoroughStrategy, seven transformational goals havebeen identified.

To a varying extent, the achievement of theseven T-Goals relies on a spatial dimensionwhich relies on appropriate land use policiesand development allocations being establishedto enable their implementation. The transformational goals to be achieved by2010 are as follows:-

1. No part of the Borough is in the bottom10 per cent of wards nationally, as measured by the local deprivation index.To achieve this all areas of the Borough needimproved access to employment and skills toraise household income. Equally improvementsin health, community safety, housing, and community cohesion need to be made. TheSpatial Strategy will not only need to ensurethat there is sufficient land identified in suitablelocations for employment purposes, but alsothat all local communities have access to jobscreated.

2. The attainment of Doncaster students atKey Stage 4 at least matches the nationalaverage. To achieve this learning needs to bevalued and supported through a variety ofmethods with improved school support and animproved learning environment in the homeand activities outside school hours. The spatialstrategy will need to ensure that developmentneeds for educational establishments areaccommodated and that facilities exist to support lifelong learning in its widest sense.

3. Every household in the Doncaster areahas access to ICT facilities and services,and has the skills to use these at work, athome or at leisure. The spatial strategy willhave an influence in ensuring that new devel-opment is located in areas offering relativelyeasy opportunities to build in high quality ITinfrastructure.

4. Doncaster town is achieving an UrbanRenaissance of increasing resident andvisitor numbers, and rising retail, commercial and leisure values at ratescomparable to those of leading urbanareas in the North. To achieve this, it will benecessary for the delivery of high quality devel-opment and the attraction of new facilities andopportunities for town centres through theencouragement of urban living through highquality, safe and accessible housing and relat-ed facilities. The spatial strategy has a funda-mental role in achieving an Urban Renaissancethrough promoting appropriate developmentand setting high standards through policies fornew development.

5.The Borough is experiencing vigorous democratic renewal and communityengagement in civic and civil society, evident not just from increases in turnoutat elections but also by a significantgrowth in involvement in decision makingat all levels. The process for reviewing theUDP will encourage community involvementand participation in setting the spatial strate-gy for Doncaster.

6. All citizens will be able to appreciateDoncaster’s rural dimension and value it’s natural environment. Doncaster will exceedall major national targets for sustainability.To achieve this the Borough will aim for efficientuse of natural resources, producing less wasteand pollution, improving access between urbanareas and an increasingly diverse natural environment. The UDP Review will maintainexisting policies aimed at protecting the naturalenvironment and promote public access to thecountryside. It will contain relevant policies tosupport sustainable development.

2. Future Development Strategy

10 11

7. Doncaster having the fastest growing regional airport in the north of England,with a range of direct and related employment opportunities for local peoplebeing generated to service this and relateddevelopments. To achieve this Doncastermust attract new businesses with a national orinternational profile and ensure that employ-ment areas are developed to a high quality andthat people within the Borough develop thenecessary high level of skills to access newemployment opportunities. The spatial strategywill set out policies and proposals to enablethese employment opportunities to be realised.

As a Borough of Development, Doncasterwill increase its national and regional role; promote opportunities for economy and enterprise in high growth sectors; Build on thestrengths of Doncaster as a premier transportinterchange; Deliver a high quality urban renaissance of urban centres; promote sustainability and safeguard the environment;and promote high quality and distinctive cultural opportunities across the Borough.

As a Borough of Communities, Doncasterwill tackle deprivation, improve communitysafety and reduce the fear of crime, increasethe sustainability of local communities, andensure that all groups can participate in andbenefit from the development of the Borough.

As a Borough of People, Doncaster will investin decent housing for all households, supportall groups and individuals in the borough, par-ticularly the old, children and families, and pro-mote health improvement

As the key spatial strategy for the Boroughand Statutory land use plan upto 2016, thereviewed UDP will support the achievement ofthe Councils Transformational Goals in a number of ways by setting a land use strategythat either directly or indirectly relates to theirobjectives.

LINKS TO OTHER STRATEGIES.

The Unitary Development Plan is one of theCouncils key operational strategies and plans.It sits alongside a number of strategies thatalso affect particular aspects of land use.These include the housing Strategy;Greenspace Strategy; Local Transport Plan;Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy and TourismStrategy amongst others.

Additionally a number of important strategiesrelate to the Objective 1 funding programme.Based on a Single Programme Document.Integrated Development Plans (IDP) have beenapproved for the delivery of specific projectsbased on land use allocations in the existingadopted UDP. These relate to Doncaster UrbanCentre, and individually for the StrategicEconomic Zones Based on the M18 motorwaycorridor and The Dearne. These are currentlybeing reviewed. Additionally an IDP has beenprepared for the regeneration of former coal-fields and northern Doncaster.

A Borough of Development - The BoroughStrategy sets out specific priorities in order tomeet its aspirations as a Borough ofDevelopment. These include progress in anumber of key areas including:-

Regional and national profile – we will buildon our existing strengths (e.g. transport inter-change, the "Leger" brand) to create a numberof new "products" and "brands" of internationaland national quality (e.g. the airport; the M18growth and development corridor; the "city cen-tre" roles and functions of the urban centre; theUK’s first "education city"; specialist compe-tences in food, environment and energy; andso on).

Economy and enterprise – we will increaseefforts to attract and nurture new industry inhigh growth and high technology sectors; andto promote a culture of enterprise and innova-tion within the Borough.

Transport Infrastructure – we will develop themodern transport and infrastructure thatDoncaster needs to be economically success-ful and socially inclusive – focusing particularlyon the opportunity for Yorkshire’s premier inter-national airport; our role as a national transportinterchange on the road and rail networks; andon connecting our local communities effectivelyto areas of growth and development.

New Technology - Doncaster will increase thepenetration of new technologies throughout theBorough, in particular in terms of access tobackbone ICT networks; technologies in sec-tors where Doncaster has a comparativeadvantage and "centre of competence"; and wewill develop the skills base to use these newtechnologies effectively.

Urban Renaissance – we will develop the "citycentre" functions of the urban centre at nationallevels of quality – particularly around retail,employment and commerce, learning andskills, health, culture and leisure, residential,and transport roles.

Environment and Sustainability – we will dis-tribute growth and development throughout theBorough in a sustainable manner, particularlyby building on the strengths of our district cen-tres and rural areas for employment, tourismand leisure, food, environment and energyDevelopments.

Learning and Skills – we will equip local peo-ple with the skills and aptitude to participatefully in the growth and development of theBorough, prioritising the "education city" initia-tive, lifelong learning and the school improve-ment agendas.

Culture – we will promote the distinctive cul-ture and values of Doncaster communities as akey element of our identity as a successful,cohesive Borough.

LOCAL ACTION PLANS

A number of local communities in the Boroughare being encouraged to prepare local actionplans for their communities and this is encour-aged by the Council. Local action plans cancover a wide variety of activity relevant to thelocality, some of which will be relevant to thedevelopment and implementation of planningpolicy.

Government guidance is that local action plansshould have regard to national, regional andlocal planning policy. It is therefore importantfor local communities and the local planningauthority to work closely together in the devel-opment of local action plans.

2. Future Development Strategy 2. Future Development Strategy

10 11

7. Doncaster having the fastest growing regional airport in the north of England,with a range of direct and related employment opportunities for local peoplebeing generated to service this and relateddevelopments. To achieve this Doncastermust attract new businesses with a national orinternational profile and ensure that employ-ment areas are developed to a high quality andthat people within the Borough develop thenecessary high level of skills to access newemployment opportunities. The spatial strategywill set out policies and proposals to enablethese employment opportunities to be realised.

As a Borough of Development, Doncasterwill increase its national and regional role; promote opportunities for economy and enterprise in high growth sectors; Build on thestrengths of Doncaster as a premier transportinterchange; Deliver a high quality urban renaissance of urban centres; promote sustainability and safeguard the environment;and promote high quality and distinctive cultural opportunities across the Borough.

As a Borough of Communities, Doncasterwill tackle deprivation, improve communitysafety and reduce the fear of crime, increasethe sustainability of local communities, andensure that all groups can participate in andbenefit from the development of the Borough.

As a Borough of People, Doncaster will investin decent housing for all households, supportall groups and individuals in the borough, par-ticularly the old, children and families, and pro-mote health improvement

As the key spatial strategy for the Boroughand Statutory land use plan upto 2016, thereviewed UDP will support the achievement ofthe Councils Transformational Goals in a number of ways by setting a land use strategythat either directly or indirectly relates to theirobjectives.

LINKS TO OTHER STRATEGIES.

The Unitary Development Plan is one of theCouncils key operational strategies and plans.It sits alongside a number of strategies thatalso affect particular aspects of land use.These include the housing Strategy;Greenspace Strategy; Local Transport Plan;Neighbourhood Renewal Strategy and TourismStrategy amongst others.

Additionally a number of important strategiesrelate to the Objective 1 funding programme.Based on a Single Programme Document.Integrated Development Plans (IDP) have beenapproved for the delivery of specific projectsbased on land use allocations in the existingadopted UDP. These relate to Doncaster UrbanCentre, and individually for the StrategicEconomic Zones Based on the M18 motorwaycorridor and The Dearne. These are currentlybeing reviewed. Additionally an IDP has beenprepared for the regeneration of former coal-fields and northern Doncaster.

A Borough of Development - The BoroughStrategy sets out specific priorities in order tomeet its aspirations as a Borough ofDevelopment. These include progress in anumber of key areas including:-

Regional and national profile – we will buildon our existing strengths (e.g. transport inter-change, the "Leger" brand) to create a numberof new "products" and "brands" of internationaland national quality (e.g. the airport; the M18growth and development corridor; the "city cen-tre" roles and functions of the urban centre; theUK’s first "education city"; specialist compe-tences in food, environment and energy; andso on).

Economy and enterprise – we will increaseefforts to attract and nurture new industry inhigh growth and high technology sectors; andto promote a culture of enterprise and innova-tion within the Borough.

Transport Infrastructure – we will develop themodern transport and infrastructure thatDoncaster needs to be economically success-ful and socially inclusive – focusing particularlyon the opportunity for Yorkshire’s premier inter-national airport; our role as a national transportinterchange on the road and rail networks; andon connecting our local communities effectivelyto areas of growth and development.

New Technology - Doncaster will increase thepenetration of new technologies throughout theBorough, in particular in terms of access tobackbone ICT networks; technologies in sec-tors where Doncaster has a comparativeadvantage and "centre of competence"; and wewill develop the skills base to use these newtechnologies effectively.

Urban Renaissance – we will develop the "citycentre" functions of the urban centre at nationallevels of quality – particularly around retail,employment and commerce, learning andskills, health, culture and leisure, residential,and transport roles.

Environment and Sustainability – we will dis-tribute growth and development throughout theBorough in a sustainable manner, particularlyby building on the strengths of our district cen-tres and rural areas for employment, tourismand leisure, food, environment and energyDevelopments.

Learning and Skills – we will equip local peo-ple with the skills and aptitude to participatefully in the growth and development of theBorough, prioritising the "education city" initia-tive, lifelong learning and the school improve-ment agendas.

Culture – we will promote the distinctive cul-ture and values of Doncaster communities as akey element of our identity as a successful,cohesive Borough.

LOCAL ACTION PLANS

A number of local communities in the Boroughare being encouraged to prepare local actionplans for their communities and this is encour-aged by the Council. Local action plans cancover a wide variety of activity relevant to thelocality, some of which will be relevant to thedevelopment and implementation of planningpolicy.

Government guidance is that local action plansshould have regard to national, regional andlocal planning policy. It is therefore importantfor local communities and the local planningauthority to work closely together in the devel-opment of local action plans.

2. Future Development Strategy 2. Future Development Strategy

12 13

2. Future Development Strategy

20 KEY STRATEGIC LAND USEPRINCIPLES

The purpose of this Issues Report is to high-light the most important land use choiceswhich the UDP will need to address. However itis considered that the spatial land use strategywill be underpinned by 20 Key StrategicPrinciples:

1. Building in environmental, economic andsocial Sustainability into all aspects of development waste disposal facilities andrenewable energry and in terms of environ-ment, economic and social sustainability.

2. Developing an economic strategy thatseeks to broaden the base of the local economy, with greater emphasis on growthsectors of the economy and fostering sustainable growth principles. This will build onthe Objective1 strategy, particularly that relatingto the M18 and Dearne Strategic EconomicZones and Doncaster Urban Centre.

3. Achieving an Urban Renaissance throughintegrating the best principles of urban design,and integrating community and physical development, securing an economic future for communities, and optimising the existing andreuse of land.

4. Achieving a high quality environmentthrough design in all new developments.

5. Promoting more mixed-use developments.

6. Maximising the use of brownfield land anduse land more efficiently.

7. Using land more efficiently by increasinghousing densities.

8. Safeguarding the natural environmentthrough promoting Brownfield beforeGreenfield development and conserving impor-tant areas of countryside, and recognisedareas of wildlife, landscape and heritage value.

9. Safeguarding the built heritage includingconservation areas, listed buildings and sites ofarchaeological importance.

10. Avoiding building in areas liable to floodor which would increase the risk of floodingelsewhere.

11. Making provision to meet the Borough’shousing requirement up to 2016, includingaffordable housing in high quality safe environ-ments and in locations which contribute to anurban renaissance and promote brownfieldbefore Greenfield sites. Assist in housing mar-ket renewal in areas currently experiencing diffi-culties.

12. Protecting and enhancing the role andfunction of Doncaster Town Centre, and otherkey settlements. In particular the market townsof Mexborough and Thorne and former collierysettlements and local market towns as localservice centres.

13. Integrating existing and future developmentwith transport provision. In particular devel-oping high levels of accessibility throughmeans other than the private car so as to sup-port the improvement of public transport provi-sion whilst supporting necessary road andother infrastructure provision.

14. Retaining the existing general extent of theGreen Belt

15. Protecting the countryside for the sakeof its landscape, wildlife, amenity, agricultureand natural resources.

16. Supporting the development of former RAFFinningley as an international civil airport forDoncaster, South Yorkshire and the Region.

17. Supporting the development of thosemajor development projects which will helpDoncaster meet its transformational goalsincluding:-

● Redevelopment of Doncaster Waterfront (including development of the Education City Concept)

● Waterdale redevelopment,

● Ongoing developments at Doncaster Lakeside,

● Proposed improvements to Doncaster Racecourse and Conference facilities

● Doncaster Interchange (incorporating Frenchgate Centre extension),

● New Community Stadium

● New Performance Venue

● Restoration and redevelopment of the former colliery sites of Bentley, Brodsworth, Askern, Edlington and Armthorpe

18. Supporting A Rural Renaissance by providing for sustainable development withinrural areas which meets the economic andsocial needs of its people whilst maintainingand enhancing the character of the countryside.

19. Protecting the Borough’s Greenspace andproviding for new and improved Greenspaceand recreation facilities to meet new requirements and existing deficiencies.

20. Supporting the minimising of wasteproduction and the maximisation of waste recycling.

12 13

2. Future Development Strategy

20 KEY STRATEGIC LAND USEPRINCIPLES

The purpose of this Issues Report is to high-light the most important land use choiceswhich the UDP will need to address. However itis considered that the spatial land use strategywill be underpinned by 20 Key StrategicPrinciples:

1. Building in environmental, economic andsocial Sustainability into all aspects of development waste disposal facilities andrenewable energry and in terms of environ-ment, economic and social sustainability.

2. Developing an economic strategy thatseeks to broaden the base of the local economy, with greater emphasis on growthsectors of the economy and fostering sustainable growth principles. This will build onthe Objective1 strategy, particularly that relatingto the M18 and Dearne Strategic EconomicZones and Doncaster Urban Centre.

3. Achieving an Urban Renaissance throughintegrating the best principles of urban design,and integrating community and physical development, securing an economic future for communities, and optimising the existing andreuse of land.

4. Achieving a high quality environmentthrough design in all new developments.

5. Promoting more mixed-use developments.

6. Maximising the use of brownfield land anduse land more efficiently.

7. Using land more efficiently by increasinghousing densities.

8. Safeguarding the natural environmentthrough promoting Brownfield beforeGreenfield development and conserving impor-tant areas of countryside, and recognisedareas of wildlife, landscape and heritage value.

9. Safeguarding the built heritage includingconservation areas, listed buildings and sites ofarchaeological importance.

10. Avoiding building in areas liable to floodor which would increase the risk of floodingelsewhere.

11. Making provision to meet the Borough’shousing requirement up to 2016, includingaffordable housing in high quality safe environ-ments and in locations which contribute to anurban renaissance and promote brownfieldbefore Greenfield sites. Assist in housing mar-ket renewal in areas currently experiencing diffi-culties.

12. Protecting and enhancing the role andfunction of Doncaster Town Centre, and otherkey settlements. In particular the market townsof Mexborough and Thorne and former collierysettlements and local market towns as localservice centres.

13. Integrating existing and future developmentwith transport provision. In particular devel-oping high levels of accessibility throughmeans other than the private car so as to sup-port the improvement of public transport provi-sion whilst supporting necessary road andother infrastructure provision.

14. Retaining the existing general extent of theGreen Belt

15. Protecting the countryside for the sakeof its landscape, wildlife, amenity, agricultureand natural resources.

16. Supporting the development of former RAFFinningley as an international civil airport forDoncaster, South Yorkshire and the Region.

17. Supporting the development of thosemajor development projects which will helpDoncaster meet its transformational goalsincluding:-

● Redevelopment of Doncaster Waterfront (including development of the Education City Concept)

● Waterdale redevelopment,

● Ongoing developments at Doncaster Lakeside,

● Proposed improvements to Doncaster Racecourse and Conference facilities

● Doncaster Interchange (incorporating Frenchgate Centre extension),

● New Community Stadium

● New Performance Venue

● Restoration and redevelopment of the former colliery sites of Bentley, Brodsworth, Askern, Edlington and Armthorpe

18. Supporting A Rural Renaissance by providing for sustainable development withinrural areas which meets the economic andsocial needs of its people whilst maintainingand enhancing the character of the countryside.

19. Protecting the Borough’s Greenspace andproviding for new and improved Greenspaceand recreation facilities to meet new requirements and existing deficiencies.

20. Supporting the minimising of wasteproduction and the maximisation of waste recycling.

14 15

3. Economy and Employment 3. Economy and Employment

INTRODUCTION

The economy of Doncaster is undergoing amajor structural change. The Borough suffereddamage to its economy in the 1980s and early90s through colliery closures and a decline intraditional manufacturing with severe unem-ployment resulting, in older urban communitiesand isolated mining settlements. In the lastdecade problems have remained due to socialdecline, and increasing economic isolation.Doncaster Borough remains one of the mostpopulous in the region and still retains a largeeconomically active population. The economicproblems facing the area have been reflectedby South Yorkshire being given Objective 1 status, indicating that the GDP per head ofpopulation has fallen below 75% of theEuropean Union average.

A variety of Government and European grantregimes have been utilised as available toassist regeneration and attract investment.Some programmes are reaching maturity withothers just beginning. However some parts ofthe Borough have continued to decline wherepoor environment and access have hamperedregeneration. The Borough contains a substantial low wage economy and significantunder-employment, with pockets of high unemployment and social deprivation.

KEY FACTS

● There are currently 4969 people unemployed (a rate of 4.3%); the national rate is 3%. The Borough contains a substantial low wage economy and pockets of high unemployment and socialdeprivation. The low GDP rate in Doncaster/South Yorkshire resulted in Objective1 designattion

● Over the last five years 849,000 sq metresof employment floorspace has been occupied with 14,149 jobs created and £361 million invested in Doncaster. There is currently 483 hectares of vacant land designated for employment purposes

● 70% of Doncaster’s workforce are employed in service industries, 18% in Manufacturing and 9% in Construction Mining now employs very few people in Doncaster with only two remaining pits in operation (Rossington &Hatfield/Stainforth). Agricultural employment is also very modest despite agriculture being by far the biggest land use at 67% in the Borough.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● UDPs should adopt a realistic approach to employment land requirements, and provide an appropriate range of employment land for different types of occupier which is capable of development and well served by infrastructure.

● The UDP should adopt policies and proposals to assist in the need for restructuring of the local economy towards a more modern and sustainable mix of employment opportunities in growth sectors of the economy.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Allocated sufficient employment land up to 2006 in a wide range of locations and types of site. This included some verylarge sites alongside motorway junctions as part of a positive approach to attracting inward investment following the loss of jobs in the mining and manufacturing industries

ISSUE EMP1- The need for employment land.

Doncaster has 500ha/20 years + employmentland available across the Borough given current rates of development i.e. 25ha a year.Take up of employment land in the Boroughhas increased since the mid 90’s. Land take-upvaries by location within the Borough and theM18 corridor currently enjoys a high demandon a range of sites. This is due to theavailability of a range of serviced land,

motorway access, and market perception.

There is an adequate supply of employmentland overall but there may be a need for moreland in high growth areas and in the StrategicEmployment Zones identified in the Objective 1process. Assessing the relative importance ofnew and existing locations in the UDP will takeplace during the UDP review. Positive criteriafor inclusion could include; location withindeprived settlements, use of brown-field landand buildings, number and types of job gener-ated, transport integration and access, andpotential funding match.

Having regard to the overall current supply ofemployment land, if new sites are to bebrought forward we need to look carefully atde-allocating sites (especially greenfield sites)which are less likely to come forward for development. All land committed in the adopted UDP should be reviewed in terms ofviability. This is to avoid blighting sites especially in urban areas and to considerwhere alternative land uses might be appropriate. There is a need to re-allocate unviable employment sites to more suitableuses including for housing. This will make themost of resources for servicing viable employment sites, maximise site take-up, assistjob creation and reduce use of green-field land.

The same process will be applied to underusedhousing land.

There is little green-field land for employment inour Dearne Valley towns such as Mexboroughdue to green-belt constraints and readyavailability of land in central Dearne at Manversin Rotherham. However the latter is now mostlydeveloped while unemployment remains wellabove average in certain parts of the Dearne. It would appear that deprived areas such asDenaby / Conaby / Edlington are not well ableto access new employment opportunities. Thisis due to a combination of poor transport links,low car ownership and lack of certain skills.There is however underused housing land within these settlements that may be suitablefor employment uses. These would includereuse of existing larger buildings for specificusers. Such employment opportunities for thelocal community can be protected for such apurpose.

The release of Greenbelt land for employmentpurposes would need to be justified by excep-tional circumstances. This issue is dealt with inthe Countryside Issues section of the issuespaper.

How much Employment Land is needed?

14 15

3. Economy and Employment 3. Economy and Employment

INTRODUCTION

The economy of Doncaster is undergoing amajor structural change. The Borough suffereddamage to its economy in the 1980s and early90s through colliery closures and a decline intraditional manufacturing with severe unem-ployment resulting, in older urban communitiesand isolated mining settlements. In the lastdecade problems have remained due to socialdecline, and increasing economic isolation.Doncaster Borough remains one of the mostpopulous in the region and still retains a largeeconomically active population. The economicproblems facing the area have been reflectedby South Yorkshire being given Objective 1 status, indicating that the GDP per head ofpopulation has fallen below 75% of theEuropean Union average.

A variety of Government and European grantregimes have been utilised as available toassist regeneration and attract investment.Some programmes are reaching maturity withothers just beginning. However some parts ofthe Borough have continued to decline wherepoor environment and access have hamperedregeneration. The Borough contains a substantial low wage economy and significantunder-employment, with pockets of high unemployment and social deprivation.

KEY FACTS

● There are currently 4969 people unemployed (a rate of 4.3%); the national rate is 3%. The Borough contains a substantial low wage economy and pockets of high unemployment and socialdeprivation. The low GDP rate in Doncaster/South Yorkshire resulted in Objective1 designattion

● Over the last five years 849,000 sq metresof employment floorspace has been occupied with 14,149 jobs created and £361 million invested in Doncaster. There is currently 483 hectares of vacant land designated for employment purposes

● 70% of Doncaster’s workforce are employed in service industries, 18% in Manufacturing and 9% in Construction Mining now employs very few people in Doncaster with only two remaining pits in operation (Rossington &Hatfield/Stainforth). Agricultural employment is also very modest despite agriculture being by far the biggest land use at 67% in the Borough.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● UDPs should adopt a realistic approach to employment land requirements, and provide an appropriate range of employment land for different types of occupier which is capable of development and well served by infrastructure.

● The UDP should adopt policies and proposals to assist in the need for restructuring of the local economy towards a more modern and sustainable mix of employment opportunities in growth sectors of the economy.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Allocated sufficient employment land up to 2006 in a wide range of locations and types of site. This included some verylarge sites alongside motorway junctions as part of a positive approach to attracting inward investment following the loss of jobs in the mining and manufacturing industries

ISSUE EMP1- The need for employment land.

Doncaster has 500ha/20 years + employmentland available across the Borough given current rates of development i.e. 25ha a year.Take up of employment land in the Boroughhas increased since the mid 90’s. Land take-upvaries by location within the Borough and theM18 corridor currently enjoys a high demandon a range of sites. This is due to theavailability of a range of serviced land,

motorway access, and market perception.

There is an adequate supply of employmentland overall but there may be a need for moreland in high growth areas and in the StrategicEmployment Zones identified in the Objective 1process. Assessing the relative importance ofnew and existing locations in the UDP will takeplace during the UDP review. Positive criteriafor inclusion could include; location withindeprived settlements, use of brown-field landand buildings, number and types of job gener-ated, transport integration and access, andpotential funding match.

Having regard to the overall current supply ofemployment land, if new sites are to bebrought forward we need to look carefully atde-allocating sites (especially greenfield sites)which are less likely to come forward for development. All land committed in the adopted UDP should be reviewed in terms ofviability. This is to avoid blighting sites especially in urban areas and to considerwhere alternative land uses might be appropriate. There is a need to re-allocate unviable employment sites to more suitableuses including for housing. This will make themost of resources for servicing viable employment sites, maximise site take-up, assistjob creation and reduce use of green-field land.

The same process will be applied to underusedhousing land.

There is little green-field land for employment inour Dearne Valley towns such as Mexboroughdue to green-belt constraints and readyavailability of land in central Dearne at Manversin Rotherham. However the latter is now mostlydeveloped while unemployment remains wellabove average in certain parts of the Dearne. It would appear that deprived areas such asDenaby / Conaby / Edlington are not well ableto access new employment opportunities. Thisis due to a combination of poor transport links,low car ownership and lack of certain skills.There is however underused housing land within these settlements that may be suitablefor employment uses. These would includereuse of existing larger buildings for specificusers. Such employment opportunities for thelocal community can be protected for such apurpose.

The release of Greenbelt land for employmentpurposes would need to be justified by excep-tional circumstances. This issue is dealt with inthe Countryside Issues section of the issuespaper.

How much Employment Land is needed?

16 17

ISSUE EMP 3 - Restriction of employment uses withinsites.

Within employment sites there could generallybe a range of potential users with a range ofeffects in terms of size of land requirement,employment generation, impact on the sur-rounding area, traffic generation, noise andother impacts, as well as a wide range in termsof potential for both short and long term eco-nomic regeneration.

Regional Planning Guidance specifically identi-fies the potential advantages to be gained fromidentifying sites for strategic employment devel-opment and safeguarding such sites frompiecemeal development

The concept of business clustering is beingpromoted both regionally and sub-regionally toenable business to develop and benefit fromproximity to similar related activity. To maximisethe potential for future clustering employmentsites may need to be identified for specific eco-nomic activity and protected as a particular sitefor cluster activity.

Should specific types of employment usebe identified for specific sites, and thesesites restricted to those uses.?

In particular, should restrictions beimposed to favour growth industry, andhelp stimulate clustering through physicalproximity?

ISSUE EMP 4- Existing unused employment allocations.

A number of sites are identified within theadopted UDP for employment purposes. A number of these have now been developed.All land committed for employment use in theUDP should be reviewed in terms of suitabilityand market viability. An analysis of development in the Borough since 1990 issummarised in Supporting Document SD2

The highest levels of development have takenplace on those sites closest to nodal points offthe major strategic road network, most notablyM18 junctions 3, 4 and 6, and the intersectionof the A1(M) and the A638 at Redhouse. Thisreflects a national trend with an increasingdevelopment preference for sites out of townwith good car related access. Strategic adviceboth nationally and locally is that this trend isset to continue, and pressure is likely to continue to come from the development industry for new allocations in locations withfirst class car access.

Where land already allocated for employmentpurposes remains undeveloped and isassessed to be unviable for employment purposes in the future, this land should beassessed for alternative uses or de-allocation,especially where greenfield. In particular, bothNational advice and Regional PlanningGuidance suggests higher levels of re-use ofBrownfield land, and land within existing urbanframeworks. Alternative uses, particularly forhousing should be carefully considered forthese sites.

Should existing unused employment landbe re-allocated, particularly for housingpurposes?

ISSUE EMP 2- Where should employment land be located.

National Planning Guidance (PPG4) on eco-nomic development has remained unchangedsince 1992. The priority remains for a realisticapproach to employment land requirements,and to provide an appropriate range ofemployment land for different types of occupierwhich is capable of development and wellserved by infrastructure. Current regional andsub-regional policy set out in the RegionalEconomic Strategy (1999 currently underreview) Regional Planning Guidance (issued2001) and the program associated with SouthYorkshire Objective1 status, reinforces the needfor restructuring of the local economy towardsa more modern and sustainable mix of employ-ment opportunities in growth sectors of theeconomy.

There is a continuing national trend for a devel-opment preference for sites out of town withgood car related access. Strategic advice bothnationally and regionally is that this trend is setto continue, and pressure is likely to continueto come from the development industry for newallocations in locations with first class caraccess.

In practice this trend will be reflected by astrong demand for new employment alloca-tions along the M18 corridor with easy accessto existing or new junctions, and along theA1(M) corridor. However such locations arelikely to have poor links to local communitieswith consequential problems of access, particularly by public transport.

Doncaster has the potential to attract and sup-port new developments around a proposedcivil airport at the former Finningley airbase.

If the airport proceeds, associated businesswould centre on the Airport. The beginnings ofa cluster are already apparent, with storageand office uses taking place in the many existing buildings that exist on the site. Thesemostly technical buildings are let on short leases and form part of a 28Ha site suitable foremployment uses. With an airport there will beimproved ICT links and in the medium term thepossibility of a link road that may potentiallymake further development opportunities. A modern airport tends to have related landrequirements across a wide area. For Finningley airport to optimise its development there will need to be land identified to meet this requirement. This mayneed to be identified now and possibly phasedto become available as The Airport grows.

In general terms, both national and regionalplanning policy favours the development ofBrownfield land rather than Greenfield land,and this approach is broadly supported.However, it is likely that the supply ofBrownfield land capable of attracting inwardinvestment is limited due to a number of locational factors. In order to achieve the fullpotential that Doncaster offers for creating newjobs and achieving economic regeneration, anumber of new Greenfield Employment sitesare likely to be needed in order to provide arange of employment sites most able to attractinward investment to the Borough.

Should new employment land be identifiedalong major transport corridors?

Should a new airport at Finningley be a primary focus for new employment land?

Should further Greenfield land be madeavailable for Employment purposes to support economic regeneration?

3. Economy and Employment

16 17

ISSUE EMP 3 - Restriction of employment uses withinsites.

Within employment sites there could generallybe a range of potential users with a range ofeffects in terms of size of land requirement,employment generation, impact on the sur-rounding area, traffic generation, noise andother impacts, as well as a wide range in termsof potential for both short and long term eco-nomic regeneration.

Regional Planning Guidance specifically identi-fies the potential advantages to be gained fromidentifying sites for strategic employment devel-opment and safeguarding such sites frompiecemeal development

The concept of business clustering is beingpromoted both regionally and sub-regionally toenable business to develop and benefit fromproximity to similar related activity. To maximisethe potential for future clustering employmentsites may need to be identified for specific eco-nomic activity and protected as a particular sitefor cluster activity.

Should specific types of employment usebe identified for specific sites, and thesesites restricted to those uses.?

In particular, should restrictions beimposed to favour growth industry, andhelp stimulate clustering through physicalproximity?

ISSUE EMP 4- Existing unused employment allocations.

A number of sites are identified within theadopted UDP for employment purposes. A number of these have now been developed.All land committed for employment use in theUDP should be reviewed in terms of suitabilityand market viability. An analysis of development in the Borough since 1990 issummarised in Supporting Document SD2

The highest levels of development have takenplace on those sites closest to nodal points offthe major strategic road network, most notablyM18 junctions 3, 4 and 6, and the intersectionof the A1(M) and the A638 at Redhouse. Thisreflects a national trend with an increasingdevelopment preference for sites out of townwith good car related access. Strategic adviceboth nationally and locally is that this trend isset to continue, and pressure is likely to continue to come from the development industry for new allocations in locations withfirst class car access.

Where land already allocated for employmentpurposes remains undeveloped and isassessed to be unviable for employment purposes in the future, this land should beassessed for alternative uses or de-allocation,especially where greenfield. In particular, bothNational advice and Regional PlanningGuidance suggests higher levels of re-use ofBrownfield land, and land within existing urbanframeworks. Alternative uses, particularly forhousing should be carefully considered forthese sites.

Should existing unused employment landbe re-allocated, particularly for housingpurposes?

ISSUE EMP 2- Where should employment land be located.

National Planning Guidance (PPG4) on eco-nomic development has remained unchangedsince 1992. The priority remains for a realisticapproach to employment land requirements,and to provide an appropriate range ofemployment land for different types of occupierwhich is capable of development and wellserved by infrastructure. Current regional andsub-regional policy set out in the RegionalEconomic Strategy (1999 currently underreview) Regional Planning Guidance (issued2001) and the program associated with SouthYorkshire Objective1 status, reinforces the needfor restructuring of the local economy towardsa more modern and sustainable mix of employ-ment opportunities in growth sectors of theeconomy.

There is a continuing national trend for a devel-opment preference for sites out of town withgood car related access. Strategic advice bothnationally and regionally is that this trend is setto continue, and pressure is likely to continueto come from the development industry for newallocations in locations with first class caraccess.

In practice this trend will be reflected by astrong demand for new employment alloca-tions along the M18 corridor with easy accessto existing or new junctions, and along theA1(M) corridor. However such locations arelikely to have poor links to local communitieswith consequential problems of access, particularly by public transport.

Doncaster has the potential to attract and sup-port new developments around a proposedcivil airport at the former Finningley airbase.

If the airport proceeds, associated businesswould centre on the Airport. The beginnings ofa cluster are already apparent, with storageand office uses taking place in the many existing buildings that exist on the site. Thesemostly technical buildings are let on short leases and form part of a 28Ha site suitable foremployment uses. With an airport there will beimproved ICT links and in the medium term thepossibility of a link road that may potentiallymake further development opportunities. A modern airport tends to have related landrequirements across a wide area. For Finningley airport to optimise its development there will need to be land identified to meet this requirement. This mayneed to be identified now and possibly phasedto become available as The Airport grows.

In general terms, both national and regionalplanning policy favours the development ofBrownfield land rather than Greenfield land,and this approach is broadly supported.However, it is likely that the supply ofBrownfield land capable of attracting inwardinvestment is limited due to a number of locational factors. In order to achieve the fullpotential that Doncaster offers for creating newjobs and achieving economic regeneration, anumber of new Greenfield Employment sitesare likely to be needed in order to provide arange of employment sites most able to attractinward investment to the Borough.

Should new employment land be identifiedalong major transport corridors?

Should a new airport at Finningley be a primary focus for new employment land?

Should further Greenfield land be madeavailable for Employment purposes to support economic regeneration?

3. Economy and Employment

18 19

ISSUE EMP 5 - Green travel Plans.

Major congestion is caused on the highwaynetwork at peak times by the use of privatecars for commuting. Where new employmentsites are located off major existing public trans-port corridors, employees will often be facedwith few alternatives to the use of cars for com-muting. As a requirement of the developmentof significant sites in such locations, new devel-opments should make realistic and definitiveattempts to provide workable alternatives suchas public transport provision or car shareplans, for employees through the planneddevelopment of the site.

Should major new developments berequired to demonstrate clear and viablealternatives to the private car for employ-ees on site to travel to and from work?

ISSUE EMP 6- Settlement specific employment

allocations.

The Borough Strategy produced by Doncasterstrategic Partnership, recognises that tacklingdeprivation within the most deprived areas ofthe borough is a key goal. The strategy recog-nises the critical importance of access toemployment and relevant skills to achieve thisgoal. Residents in the most deprived areascan often be excluded from employmentopportunities in the most economically activeparts of the borough through access difficul-ties. This issue can be tackled in part throughGreen Travel plans. Conversely employmentsites in the most deprived areas can often berelatively remote and unable to attract inwardinvestment, and as a consequence remainundeveloped.

Should employment land be identifiedspecifically in all or most large settlements?

ISSUE EMP7 - Sites for Bad Neighbour employmentuses.

Within the Borough there are a number ofemployment generating uses which because ofthe nature of the business, create a potentiallyadverse affect on their surroundings either visu-ally, or due to other factors such as noise,fumes or traffic. Many of these uses make apotentially important contribution to the localeconomy and need to be accommodated with-in the general area in an environmentallyacceptable manner with a minimal impact ontheir surroundings. An existing site identified forbad neighbour employment uses in the adopt-ed UDP at Carcroft Common, is now mostlydeveloped.

Should sites be identified specifically for‘bad neighbour’ employment uses andreserved for such uses?

Other Issues - It is intended that the UDP willcarry forward many of the current UDP employment policies. In particular policies willbe retained to:

● Ensure high quality design in employmentsites.

● Detail policy affecting existing employment Areas and encourage their improvement.

● Controlling environmental impact of industrial uses.

● Controlling retailing in employment areas

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD1 Economy and employment - Impact ofOther Policies and Strategies.SD2 Employment Land Availability data.

INTRODUCTION

The current Doncaster UDP provided sufficienthousing land for the period 1986-2003 andbeyond in order to retain the existing popula-tion and attract key workers into the Boroughas part of an overall strategy of regenerationand job creation.

Housing sites were allocated to provide for awide range of housing type, tenure, size, costand location; the priority was to provide for flex-ibility and choice and to bring forward sites inregeneration priority areas including somelarge previously developed ("brownfield") siteswhilst seeking to secure quality in all housingdevelopments. The largest of the housing allocations formed parts of large-scale mixed-use regeneration projects and/or were requiredto deliver substantial community benefits aspart of their development.

This strategy has been largely successful;housing completions 1986-2000 have been 900per annum compared to the target of 988 perannum. Perhaps more significantly house completions 1996-2000 averaged 1079 perannum-well above the target. House prices inDoncaster in 2001 rose faster than anywhereelse in the country further reflecting a buoyantlocal housing market.

The current UDP identified a land supply sufficient for 18,918 houses compared to ahousing requirement of 16,800 (although of thissupply, land for 1100 houses on two very largeGreenfield sites was phased beyond 2003).Because of this and because housing densities

in recent years have increased (reducing theamount of land needed) Doncaster still has asignificant supply of allocated housing landwhich has not yet received planning permissionand which could meet much of the housingland requirement for the UDP Review. Thisincludes some large brownfield sites which arecurrently being made ready for housing; it alsoincludes much Greenfield land however.

Since the UDP was adopted, new Governmentplanning policy on housing (PPG3-issuedMarch 2000) has radically altered the approachto housing provision as part of theGovernment’s strategy for an urban renais-sance, more sustainable communities and min-imising the loss of countryside. "Plan, monitorand manage and has replaced the "predict andprovide" approach with housing land to bereleased (i.e. granted planning permission) onlyas and when needed so that over supply ofhousing land is avoided and so that a numberof objectives can be more efficiently secured.These include securing the development ofbrownfield sites before Greenfield sites; direct-ing development towards urban areas; andmaking more efficient use of land by building athigher densities.

Regional Planning Guidance interprets andapplies national guidance as part of a regionalspatial strategy. Amongst other things it setsthe average annual housing requirement for theBorough (735) and a provisional target for theuse of brownfield land (70%).

3. Economy and Employment

4. Housing

18 19

ISSUE EMP 5 - Green travel Plans.

Major congestion is caused on the highwaynetwork at peak times by the use of privatecars for commuting. Where new employmentsites are located off major existing public trans-port corridors, employees will often be facedwith few alternatives to the use of cars for com-muting. As a requirement of the developmentof significant sites in such locations, new devel-opments should make realistic and definitiveattempts to provide workable alternatives suchas public transport provision or car shareplans, for employees through the planneddevelopment of the site.

Should major new developments berequired to demonstrate clear and viablealternatives to the private car for employ-ees on site to travel to and from work?

ISSUE EMP 6- Settlement specific employment

allocations.

The Borough Strategy produced by Doncasterstrategic Partnership, recognises that tacklingdeprivation within the most deprived areas ofthe borough is a key goal. The strategy recog-nises the critical importance of access toemployment and relevant skills to achieve thisgoal. Residents in the most deprived areascan often be excluded from employmentopportunities in the most economically activeparts of the borough through access difficul-ties. This issue can be tackled in part throughGreen Travel plans. Conversely employmentsites in the most deprived areas can often berelatively remote and unable to attract inwardinvestment, and as a consequence remainundeveloped.

Should employment land be identifiedspecifically in all or most large settlements?

ISSUE EMP7 - Sites for Bad Neighbour employmentuses.

Within the Borough there are a number ofemployment generating uses which because ofthe nature of the business, create a potentiallyadverse affect on their surroundings either visu-ally, or due to other factors such as noise,fumes or traffic. Many of these uses make apotentially important contribution to the localeconomy and need to be accommodated with-in the general area in an environmentallyacceptable manner with a minimal impact ontheir surroundings. An existing site identified forbad neighbour employment uses in the adopt-ed UDP at Carcroft Common, is now mostlydeveloped.

Should sites be identified specifically for‘bad neighbour’ employment uses andreserved for such uses?

Other Issues - It is intended that the UDP willcarry forward many of the current UDP employment policies. In particular policies willbe retained to:

● Ensure high quality design in employmentsites.

● Detail policy affecting existing employment Areas and encourage their improvement.

● Controlling environmental impact of industrial uses.

● Controlling retailing in employment areas

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD1 Economy and employment - Impact ofOther Policies and Strategies.SD2 Employment Land Availability data.

INTRODUCTION

The current Doncaster UDP provided sufficienthousing land for the period 1986-2003 andbeyond in order to retain the existing popula-tion and attract key workers into the Boroughas part of an overall strategy of regenerationand job creation.

Housing sites were allocated to provide for awide range of housing type, tenure, size, costand location; the priority was to provide for flex-ibility and choice and to bring forward sites inregeneration priority areas including somelarge previously developed ("brownfield") siteswhilst seeking to secure quality in all housingdevelopments. The largest of the housing allocations formed parts of large-scale mixed-use regeneration projects and/or were requiredto deliver substantial community benefits aspart of their development.

This strategy has been largely successful;housing completions 1986-2000 have been 900per annum compared to the target of 988 perannum. Perhaps more significantly house completions 1996-2000 averaged 1079 perannum-well above the target. House prices inDoncaster in 2001 rose faster than anywhereelse in the country further reflecting a buoyantlocal housing market.

The current UDP identified a land supply sufficient for 18,918 houses compared to ahousing requirement of 16,800 (although of thissupply, land for 1100 houses on two very largeGreenfield sites was phased beyond 2003).Because of this and because housing densities

in recent years have increased (reducing theamount of land needed) Doncaster still has asignificant supply of allocated housing landwhich has not yet received planning permissionand which could meet much of the housingland requirement for the UDP Review. Thisincludes some large brownfield sites which arecurrently being made ready for housing; it alsoincludes much Greenfield land however.

Since the UDP was adopted, new Governmentplanning policy on housing (PPG3-issuedMarch 2000) has radically altered the approachto housing provision as part of theGovernment’s strategy for an urban renais-sance, more sustainable communities and min-imising the loss of countryside. "Plan, monitorand manage and has replaced the "predict andprovide" approach with housing land to bereleased (i.e. granted planning permission) onlyas and when needed so that over supply ofhousing land is avoided and so that a numberof objectives can be more efficiently secured.These include securing the development ofbrownfield sites before Greenfield sites; direct-ing development towards urban areas; andmaking more efficient use of land by building athigher densities.

Regional Planning Guidance interprets andapplies national guidance as part of a regionalspatial strategy. Amongst other things it setsthe average annual housing requirement for theBorough (735) and a provisional target for theuse of brownfield land (70%).

3. Economy and Employment

4. Housing

4. Housing4. Housing

2120

The policies and proposals of the new UDPmust seek to deliver these national and region-al objectives. Supporting documents are avail-able which provide more detail on the nationaland regional guidance and Doncaster’s currentresidential land position.

KEY FACTS

● The population of the Borough as at 2001is 286,900; it has fallen by 4000 or 4.1% since the mid 1981 estimate of 290,000. This is a significantly smaller fall however than that for Sheffield, Barnsley and Rotherham. Doncaster has retained a large economically active population, albeit with fewer males, more older residents and a higher than average number of single parents.

● Council policies have sought to retain existing population but a major element ofdemand for housing is the continuing fall in overall household size which is a national phenomenon. National average household size has fallen from 2.7 in 1981to 2.48 in 1991 and is currently 2.3.

● More than 5000 new homes have been built in Doncaster over the last five years. 42% of these have been built on brownfield land.

● As at 1st April 2002 planning permissions existed sufficient for 1741 new houses in Doncaster

● House prices in Doncaster rose faster in 2001 than anywhere else in the country reflecting a buoyant local housing market.

● Parts of the Borough have been included within the Government’s Housing Market Renewal Initiative reflecting the fact that there are areas of poor housing and housing market failure.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Doncaster’s housing requirement to be 735 dwellings per year for the plan period1998-2016

● Brownfield sites to be developed before Greenfield sites. Doncaster’s provisional brownfield housing target is 70%

● New housing to be directed to urban areas as part of an urban renaissance

● Housing land to be released in accordance with a Plan, monitor and manage approach rather than "predict and provide".

● Land to be used more efficiently by building at higher densities and reducing the amount of land for car parking.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Provided sufficient housing land for the period 1986-2003 and beyond in order to retain the existing population and attract key workers into the Borough

● Allocated housing sites to provide for a wide range of housing type, tenure, size, cost and location; the priority was to provide for flexibility and choice and to bring forward sites in regeneration priority areas.

● Includes significant Greenfield (and brownfield) allocations which have not yetreceived planning permission.

DONCASTER’S HOUSING LANDREQUIREMENT

Government policy requires the planning sys-tem to provide sufficient homes in the rightplace and at the right time through a choice ofsites which are suitable and available. This is toensure that everyone has the opportunity of adecent home and that economic growth is notfrustrated whilst ensuring that environmentaland social considerations are not compro-mised.

Doncaster’s housing requirement for the UDPReview plan period 1998-2016 has been set bythe RPG and is 735 new dwellings per annumor 13,200 over the plan period as a wholealthough this total figure is less important thanthe annual rate. This annual requirement, whichis lower than recent annual completions (aver-age 900 per annum), cannot be changed aspart of the UDP Review process although it willbe subject to future RPG reviews.

The translation of this housing requirement intoa land requirement does however raise a num-ber of issues some of which will be dependentupon decisions taken as part of the UDPreview:

● Houses already built since 1998 and existing unimplemented planning permissions for houses will reduce the new land requirement.

● Housing allocations which were established in the current UDP but which have not yet received planning permissioncould be rolled forward in to the UDP Review and would form a substantial part of the UDP Review requirement. However some of these are greenfield sites.

● Every year many houses are built on land other than allocations, on infill plots and other small sites within built up areas. Theallocation requirement will be reduced to take account of these "windfalls".

● The greater the average density of development the smaller the land requirement will be.

● The plan, manage and monitor approach will affect the rate, timing and order (or phasing) of release of new housing land.

4. Housing4. Housing

2120

The policies and proposals of the new UDPmust seek to deliver these national and region-al objectives. Supporting documents are avail-able which provide more detail on the nationaland regional guidance and Doncaster’s currentresidential land position.

KEY FACTS

● The population of the Borough as at 2001is 286,900; it has fallen by 4000 or 4.1% since the mid 1981 estimate of 290,000. This is a significantly smaller fall however than that for Sheffield, Barnsley and Rotherham. Doncaster has retained a large economically active population, albeit with fewer males, more older residents and a higher than average number of single parents.

● Council policies have sought to retain existing population but a major element ofdemand for housing is the continuing fall in overall household size which is a national phenomenon. National average household size has fallen from 2.7 in 1981to 2.48 in 1991 and is currently 2.3.

● More than 5000 new homes have been built in Doncaster over the last five years. 42% of these have been built on brownfield land.

● As at 1st April 2002 planning permissions existed sufficient for 1741 new houses in Doncaster

● House prices in Doncaster rose faster in 2001 than anywhere else in the country reflecting a buoyant local housing market.

● Parts of the Borough have been included within the Government’s Housing Market Renewal Initiative reflecting the fact that there are areas of poor housing and housing market failure.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Doncaster’s housing requirement to be 735 dwellings per year for the plan period1998-2016

● Brownfield sites to be developed before Greenfield sites. Doncaster’s provisional brownfield housing target is 70%

● New housing to be directed to urban areas as part of an urban renaissance

● Housing land to be released in accordance with a Plan, monitor and manage approach rather than "predict and provide".

● Land to be used more efficiently by building at higher densities and reducing the amount of land for car parking.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Provided sufficient housing land for the period 1986-2003 and beyond in order to retain the existing population and attract key workers into the Borough

● Allocated housing sites to provide for a wide range of housing type, tenure, size, cost and location; the priority was to provide for flexibility and choice and to bring forward sites in regeneration priority areas.

● Includes significant Greenfield (and brownfield) allocations which have not yetreceived planning permission.

DONCASTER’S HOUSING LANDREQUIREMENT

Government policy requires the planning sys-tem to provide sufficient homes in the rightplace and at the right time through a choice ofsites which are suitable and available. This is toensure that everyone has the opportunity of adecent home and that economic growth is notfrustrated whilst ensuring that environmentaland social considerations are not compro-mised.

Doncaster’s housing requirement for the UDPReview plan period 1998-2016 has been set bythe RPG and is 735 new dwellings per annumor 13,200 over the plan period as a wholealthough this total figure is less important thanthe annual rate. This annual requirement, whichis lower than recent annual completions (aver-age 900 per annum), cannot be changed aspart of the UDP Review process although it willbe subject to future RPG reviews.

The translation of this housing requirement intoa land requirement does however raise a num-ber of issues some of which will be dependentupon decisions taken as part of the UDPreview:

● Houses already built since 1998 and existing unimplemented planning permissions for houses will reduce the new land requirement.

● Housing allocations which were established in the current UDP but which have not yet received planning permissioncould be rolled forward in to the UDP Review and would form a substantial part of the UDP Review requirement. However some of these are greenfield sites.

● Every year many houses are built on land other than allocations, on infill plots and other small sites within built up areas. Theallocation requirement will be reduced to take account of these "windfalls".

● The greater the average density of development the smaller the land requirement will be.

● The plan, manage and monitor approach will affect the rate, timing and order (or phasing) of release of new housing land.

22 23

4. Housing

ISSUE H1- Housing On Previously Developed

(Brownfield) Land

The Government has set a national target of60% of all new houses by 2008 to be built onpreviously developed land and through theconversion and re-use of existing buildings; theprovisional target for Doncaster over the period1998-2016 set out in RPG is 70%.

Just how realistic this target is will be deter-mined by a detailed study (known as an urbanpotential study) of brownfield opportunities inthe Borough. Doncaster does not have thescale of brownfield opportunities of someBoroughs (e.g. Sheffield, Leeds) and much ofwhat it does have is unsuitable for develop-ment (e.g. colliery spoil heaps). The urbanpotential study will however be comprehensiveand look at a wide range of potential brownfieldopportunities including land currently allocatedfor employment purposes.

It is possible that pursuing the 70% targetwould have an unduly strong bearing on thelocation of future housing in Doncaster i.e.houses would have to be developed whereversuitable brownfield land happened to be. Thereare a number of other possible objectives relat-ing to the location of future housing which mayor may not be entirely consistent with pursuit ofthe 70% target –see ISSUE H2 below.

Do you think that the use of brownfieldland for new housing should be maximisedwith the aim of meeting the 70%Brownfield target?

ISSUE H2- The Location Of New Housing Sites

Apart from the 70% brownfield target, nationaland regional planning guidance contains anumber of other objectives relating to the loca-tion of new housing allocations; these include:

● maximising the accessibility of new houses to jobs, shops and other services by means other than the car in the interests of sustainability

● directing housing to identified priority regeneration areas in support of an urbanrenaissance

● providing a reasonable distribution and choice of housing opportunities across the Borough whilst accepting that Doncaster’s housing requirement is Borough-wide and not apportioned to individual settlements, sub-areas or housing market areas.

● avoiding loss of green belt except where justified by exceptional circumstances

● taking account of the capacity of existing and potential physical and social infrastructure including public transport, utilities and schools

● taking account of physical and environmental constraints on the development of land including flood risk, land stability, contamination, wildlife interests, conservation and landscape value, etc.

In addition to these considerations RPG setsdown a sequential approach for searching fornew housing allocations: This states that, sub-ject to any overriding considerations of sustain-ability of different locations and to the advice inPPG3, the order of preference is as follows:

● Brownfield development within the main urban areas (Doncaster, Balby, Bentley, Bessacarr, etc.)

● Other appropriate infill within urban areas

● Extensions to the main urban areas wherethe land is accessible to jobs and services by non-car modes (with priority given to brownfield)

● Extensions to coalfield towns (Askern, Armthorpe, Conisbrough, Edlington, Rossington, Stainforth etc.) and Market Towns (Bawtry, Mexborough, Thorne and Tickhill) with priority given to brownfield

● Other development that supports the regional spatial strategy and which is accessible by non-car modes to a wide range of employment and services

RPG states that in rural areas the provision ofhousing should be to meet local needs and/orsupport local services (with priority given tobrownfield and conserving the character of thesettlement). Service villages include BarnbyDun, Dunscroft and Sprotborough).

The location of new housing in Doncastercould be determined by balancing these vari-ous objectives as opposed to exclusively pur-suing the 70% brownfield target. It is of coursepossible that the urban potential study willreveal sufficient brownfield housing opportuni-ties to enable these objectives and the 70% tar-get to be met.

Having regard to the various objectives forlocating new housing, which areas of theBorough or which sites that you are awareof do you think would be appropriate fornew housing development?

ISSUE H3 - Managing The Release Of Housing Sites

The Government has made it clear that thedelivery of new housing through the planningsystem must be based on a "plan, monitor andmanage" approach with UDP housing alloca-tions only being released (i.e. granted planningpermission) as part of a closely managed andmonitored strategy which enables local plan-ning authorities to influence not just the loca-tion of new development but also the type ofsite released and the order and timing of siterelease. This allows for control of the patternand speed of urban growth, coordination ofinfrastructure, and delivery of the brownfield tar-get. It also ensures that no more land isreleased for housing than is necessary.

Under such an approach the housing alloca-tions could be assigned to, and released inaccordance with, a number of phases (perhapsthree) covering different time periods of theplan. Each phase could include a mixture ofbrownfield and greenfield sites and anallowance for windfall development which intotal would provide for the annual rate for thatperiod. Whilst there could be some flexibility tomove allocations forward or backward (inresponse to monitoring results) the phasingstrategy would relate to the search sequencefor sites and seek to bring forward brownfieldand more sustainably located sites beforegreenfield and less sustainably located sites.

22 23

4. Housing

ISSUE H1- Housing On Previously Developed

(Brownfield) Land

The Government has set a national target of60% of all new houses by 2008 to be built onpreviously developed land and through theconversion and re-use of existing buildings; theprovisional target for Doncaster over the period1998-2016 set out in RPG is 70%.

Just how realistic this target is will be deter-mined by a detailed study (known as an urbanpotential study) of brownfield opportunities inthe Borough. Doncaster does not have thescale of brownfield opportunities of someBoroughs (e.g. Sheffield, Leeds) and much ofwhat it does have is unsuitable for develop-ment (e.g. colliery spoil heaps). The urbanpotential study will however be comprehensiveand look at a wide range of potential brownfieldopportunities including land currently allocatedfor employment purposes.

It is possible that pursuing the 70% targetwould have an unduly strong bearing on thelocation of future housing in Doncaster i.e.houses would have to be developed whereversuitable brownfield land happened to be. Thereare a number of other possible objectives relat-ing to the location of future housing which mayor may not be entirely consistent with pursuit ofthe 70% target –see ISSUE H2 below.

Do you think that the use of brownfieldland for new housing should be maximisedwith the aim of meeting the 70%Brownfield target?

ISSUE H2- The Location Of New Housing Sites

Apart from the 70% brownfield target, nationaland regional planning guidance contains anumber of other objectives relating to the loca-tion of new housing allocations; these include:

● maximising the accessibility of new houses to jobs, shops and other services by means other than the car in the interests of sustainability

● directing housing to identified priority regeneration areas in support of an urbanrenaissance

● providing a reasonable distribution and choice of housing opportunities across the Borough whilst accepting that Doncaster’s housing requirement is Borough-wide and not apportioned to individual settlements, sub-areas or housing market areas.

● avoiding loss of green belt except where justified by exceptional circumstances

● taking account of the capacity of existing and potential physical and social infrastructure including public transport, utilities and schools

● taking account of physical and environmental constraints on the development of land including flood risk, land stability, contamination, wildlife interests, conservation and landscape value, etc.

In addition to these considerations RPG setsdown a sequential approach for searching fornew housing allocations: This states that, sub-ject to any overriding considerations of sustain-ability of different locations and to the advice inPPG3, the order of preference is as follows:

● Brownfield development within the main urban areas (Doncaster, Balby, Bentley, Bessacarr, etc.)

● Other appropriate infill within urban areas

● Extensions to the main urban areas wherethe land is accessible to jobs and services by non-car modes (with priority given to brownfield)

● Extensions to coalfield towns (Askern, Armthorpe, Conisbrough, Edlington, Rossington, Stainforth etc.) and Market Towns (Bawtry, Mexborough, Thorne and Tickhill) with priority given to brownfield

● Other development that supports the regional spatial strategy and which is accessible by non-car modes to a wide range of employment and services

RPG states that in rural areas the provision ofhousing should be to meet local needs and/orsupport local services (with priority given tobrownfield and conserving the character of thesettlement). Service villages include BarnbyDun, Dunscroft and Sprotborough).

The location of new housing in Doncastercould be determined by balancing these vari-ous objectives as opposed to exclusively pur-suing the 70% brownfield target. It is of coursepossible that the urban potential study willreveal sufficient brownfield housing opportuni-ties to enable these objectives and the 70% tar-get to be met.

Having regard to the various objectives forlocating new housing, which areas of theBorough or which sites that you are awareof do you think would be appropriate fornew housing development?

ISSUE H3 - Managing The Release Of Housing Sites

The Government has made it clear that thedelivery of new housing through the planningsystem must be based on a "plan, monitor andmanage" approach with UDP housing alloca-tions only being released (i.e. granted planningpermission) as part of a closely managed andmonitored strategy which enables local plan-ning authorities to influence not just the loca-tion of new development but also the type ofsite released and the order and timing of siterelease. This allows for control of the patternand speed of urban growth, coordination ofinfrastructure, and delivery of the brownfield tar-get. It also ensures that no more land isreleased for housing than is necessary.

Under such an approach the housing alloca-tions could be assigned to, and released inaccordance with, a number of phases (perhapsthree) covering different time periods of theplan. Each phase could include a mixture ofbrownfield and greenfield sites and anallowance for windfall development which intotal would provide for the annual rate for thatperiod. Whilst there could be some flexibility tomove allocations forward or backward (inresponse to monitoring results) the phasingstrategy would relate to the search sequencefor sites and seek to bring forward brownfieldand more sustainably located sites beforegreenfield and less sustainably located sites.

24 25

The sites in Phase1 (perhaps covering the period up to 2006 and largely comprising existing permissions) would be released anddeveloped before sites in Phase 2 (2006-2011)which in turn would be released before Phase3(2011-2016) sites. Brownfield targets could beapplied to individual phases in addition to thetotal plan period although it may not be possible to achieve the desired target with thefirst phase given the number of existing planning permissions.

PPG3 states that it is not necessary to showthe whole plan period allocation on the UDPProposals Map and it may be appropriatetherefore to not identify the Phase3 allocationalthough not doing so would provide less certainty to developers and the public as towhere long-term housing sites will be.

Do you think that all of the plan periodhousing requirement should be identifiednow (i.e. shown on the UDP ProposalsMap)?

ISSUE H4: Housing Density

Widespread concern about the loss of countryside has prompted new national andregional guidance (PPG3; RPG) on housingdensity. The more efficiently land is used theless the housing land requirement will be.Current net densities in Doncaster on newmedium/large housing developments are typically about 30-35 per Hectare (HA) and areusually dominated by detached properties withminimum size gardens. PPG3 states that 30/HAshould be a minimum density and promotesdensities of 30-50/HA whilst the RPG provisional 70% brownfield target for Doncasteris based on the assumption that average density will be 38/HA.

Different densities will be appropriate in different locations. Higher densities will bemore suitable in town centres/edge of centresand other locations with good access to publictransport and other services whilst the designand layout of large housing developments willcertainly benefit from a mixture of densitieswithin. Achieving an overall average density of38/HA however will require some very differentapproaches to new housing developments withfewer detached properties and more imaginative and higher quality design solutions.If the average density achieved is less than thisthen more land (including more countrysidepossibly) will be required.

Do you think that new housing inDoncaster should be built to an averagedensity requirement of 38 per hectare?

ISSUE H5 - Urban Intensification

The objectives of accommodating more housing in towns and urban areas, using landmore efficiently and minimising loss of countryside will result in the redevelopment ofland and buildings previously used for otherpurposes and may therefore lead to the displacement of employment opportunitiesfrom residential areas. UDP policy will need totry and balance this trend with theGovernment’s desire to create more mixed-useareas.

Urban intensification is also likely to result inincreasing pressure for housing developmenton garden infill plots, tandem and backlandsites in residential areas, and on surplus openspace and community facilities.

The UDP will continue to protect those openspaces and other land uses required for communities’ needs but low density residentialareas with large properties in large gardens are particularly vulnerable to this process of intensification; these areas provide a type andcharacter of residential environment and ahousing choice which could become increasingly rare. In some cases such as alongprominent main roads into the town, the imageof the Borough could be adversely affected.There may be a case in such circumstances forpolicies which seek to maintain current densities and character.

Should the UDP Review include policies whichseek to reduce the scope for residential intensification in certain circumstances ordefined areas in the interests of protectinghousing choice and the environmentalcharacter?

ISSUE H6 - Affordable Housing

Planning has an important role to play in thedelivery of affordable housing through planningobligations attached to planning permissionsfor open market housing. Current UDP policyand SPG (in accordance with national policy)requires sites of 25 dwellings or one hectare(1HA) or more to provide up to 15% of thehouses as affordable housing; the open markethouses cross-subsidise the affordable housing.This provision can be made in the form of builtunits on the site, or land reserved within the sitefor their future development, or a sum ofmoney (a commuted sum) to be spent on thedelivery of affordable housing on another site inthe vicinity. In all cases the affordable housesare managed by a registered social landlord(usually a housing association) and kept permanently available for people in housingneed who cannot afford a house on the openmarket.

The Council’s preference has been for affordable housing to be provided in the formof built units on each site except in exceptionalcircumstances. This accords with theGovernment objective of creating mixed communities. On the other hand commutedsums can in some cases offer greater flexibilityincluding the possibility of using them for refurbishment of dilapidated properties. Insome cases they allow more affordable housesto be built for the same money on another site.

Should the current UDP affordable housingpolicy be amended either a) to make itclear that on-site built units will be requiredexcept in exceptional circumstances or b)to set down those circumstances in whichcommuted sums would actually be moreappropriate?

4. Housing

24 25

The sites in Phase1 (perhaps covering the period up to 2006 and largely comprising existing permissions) would be released anddeveloped before sites in Phase 2 (2006-2011)which in turn would be released before Phase3(2011-2016) sites. Brownfield targets could beapplied to individual phases in addition to thetotal plan period although it may not be possible to achieve the desired target with thefirst phase given the number of existing planning permissions.

PPG3 states that it is not necessary to showthe whole plan period allocation on the UDPProposals Map and it may be appropriatetherefore to not identify the Phase3 allocationalthough not doing so would provide less certainty to developers and the public as towhere long-term housing sites will be.

Do you think that all of the plan periodhousing requirement should be identifiednow (i.e. shown on the UDP ProposalsMap)?

ISSUE H4: Housing Density

Widespread concern about the loss of countryside has prompted new national andregional guidance (PPG3; RPG) on housingdensity. The more efficiently land is used theless the housing land requirement will be.Current net densities in Doncaster on newmedium/large housing developments are typically about 30-35 per Hectare (HA) and areusually dominated by detached properties withminimum size gardens. PPG3 states that 30/HAshould be a minimum density and promotesdensities of 30-50/HA whilst the RPG provisional 70% brownfield target for Doncasteris based on the assumption that average density will be 38/HA.

Different densities will be appropriate in different locations. Higher densities will bemore suitable in town centres/edge of centresand other locations with good access to publictransport and other services whilst the designand layout of large housing developments willcertainly benefit from a mixture of densitieswithin. Achieving an overall average density of38/HA however will require some very differentapproaches to new housing developments withfewer detached properties and more imaginative and higher quality design solutions.If the average density achieved is less than thisthen more land (including more countrysidepossibly) will be required.

Do you think that new housing inDoncaster should be built to an averagedensity requirement of 38 per hectare?

ISSUE H5 - Urban Intensification

The objectives of accommodating more housing in towns and urban areas, using landmore efficiently and minimising loss of countryside will result in the redevelopment ofland and buildings previously used for otherpurposes and may therefore lead to the displacement of employment opportunitiesfrom residential areas. UDP policy will need totry and balance this trend with theGovernment’s desire to create more mixed-useareas.

Urban intensification is also likely to result inincreasing pressure for housing developmenton garden infill plots, tandem and backlandsites in residential areas, and on surplus openspace and community facilities.

The UDP will continue to protect those openspaces and other land uses required for communities’ needs but low density residentialareas with large properties in large gardens are particularly vulnerable to this process of intensification; these areas provide a type andcharacter of residential environment and ahousing choice which could become increasingly rare. In some cases such as alongprominent main roads into the town, the imageof the Borough could be adversely affected.There may be a case in such circumstances forpolicies which seek to maintain current densities and character.

Should the UDP Review include policies whichseek to reduce the scope for residential intensification in certain circumstances ordefined areas in the interests of protectinghousing choice and the environmentalcharacter?

ISSUE H6 - Affordable Housing

Planning has an important role to play in thedelivery of affordable housing through planningobligations attached to planning permissionsfor open market housing. Current UDP policyand SPG (in accordance with national policy)requires sites of 25 dwellings or one hectare(1HA) or more to provide up to 15% of thehouses as affordable housing; the open markethouses cross-subsidise the affordable housing.This provision can be made in the form of builtunits on the site, or land reserved within the sitefor their future development, or a sum ofmoney (a commuted sum) to be spent on thedelivery of affordable housing on another site inthe vicinity. In all cases the affordable housesare managed by a registered social landlord(usually a housing association) and kept permanently available for people in housingneed who cannot afford a house on the openmarket.

The Council’s preference has been for affordable housing to be provided in the formof built units on each site except in exceptionalcircumstances. This accords with theGovernment objective of creating mixed communities. On the other hand commutedsums can in some cases offer greater flexibilityincluding the possibility of using them for refurbishment of dilapidated properties. Insome cases they allow more affordable housesto be built for the same money on another site.

Should the current UDP affordable housingpolicy be amended either a) to make itclear that on-site built units will be requiredexcept in exceptional circumstances or b)to set down those circumstances in whichcommuted sums would actually be moreappropriate?

4. Housing

4. Housing4. Housing

2726

ISSUE H7 - Rural Housing

The provision of new open market housing inDoncaster’s rural settlements is likely to be verylimited given the government’s urban renais-sance and sustainability objectives; brownfieldhousing targets; and RPG which states that inrural areas the provision of housing should beto meet local needs and/or support local serv-ices giving priority to brownfield opportunitiesand to the conservation/enhancement of thecharacter of the village.

However it is recognised that not enough houses are being built to meet rural housingneeds and in particular rural affordable housingneeds. Rural housing is becoming increasinglyexpensive and orientated towards commuters.As a result young people and those on lowerincomes are leaving rural villages. Governmentpolicy to create/maintain balanced communities is therefore undermined.

Current UDP affordable housing policy deliversaffordable housing as an element (15% is thetarget) of all housing sites above a certain sizethreshold (25 dwellings/1HA). In rural settlements (population 3000 or less), wherethere are fewer housing sites of this size,thresholds can be lower than this provided theyare justified by local needs assessments. IfDoncaster’s housing needs survey justifies alower threshold then this could be defined andadopted through the UDP Review process andapplied to appropriate new housing allocationsor existing uncommitted sites in rural settlements.

However given the relatively small scale of theoverall rural housing allocation this approachmay still not be sufficient to meet rural needs.Increasing the proportion of affordable units oneach site above 15% may therefore be appropriate although unless a housing association is able to provide additional

subsidy or unless the land purchase price islow the market viability of some sites could beadversely affected. Again such an approachwould need to be justified by the housingneeds survey.

An alternative approach would be to provide forrural housing needs in the nearest town ratherthan in each village. The settlement pattern inDoncaster is such that affordable housingopportunities within the market and coalfieldtowns are reasonably accessible to most of theBorough’s rural areas. These towns often servetheir surrounding rural hinterland in terms ofshops, schools and other services and could tosome extent serve their identified rural affordable housing needs.

Other possibilities are limited by the restrictionson development in the countryside. Apart fromnew allocations and small-scale infill development within village development limits,new houses in rural areas are confined to agricultural dwellings (subject to strict conditions), very limited infilling of small gaps insubstantial built frontages, and residential con-versions of appropriate buildings although this isgenerally discouraged in favour of other useswhich do more to assist rural diversification.These situations are unlikely therefore to beappropriate for affordable housing.

It is of course possible for existing properties inrural settlements to be bought by housingassociations. This would not raise planningissues and indeed would meet planning objec-tives pertaining to balanced communities etc.Alternatively housing associations may excep-tionally be able to develop new affordablehousing on infill plots/windfall sites within theexisting development limits of rural settlementswithout the use of cross-subsidy.

If, after considering the scope of all these othermeans of provision, there remains a lack ofopportunities to meet rural housing needs thennational guidance permits local authorities toadopt an "exceptions policy". This allows for thedevelopment of small sites for affordable housing on the edge of villages as an exception to normal green belt/countryside pol-icy area restraint policies. Sites would need tobe otherwise environmentally suitable and development would only be for demonstratedlocal housing needs in perpetuity. Many siteson the edge of villages will not be suitable andbecause most, possibly all, potentially suitablesites would have significant hope value for market housing it is also likely that an exceptions policy would not actually delivermuch affordable housing. This is in fact theexperience nationally.

If Doncaster’s housing needs survey demonstrates the need for new approach-es to deliver rural housing needs (includ-ing affordable housing) which of the following approaches to provision do youthink the UDP should adopt?

● In small settlements (population less than3000) apply affordable housing requirements to smaller housing sites (i.e.less than the usual 25 dwellings/1 HA threshold)

● In larger settlements (which could serve surrounding rural housing needs) apply larger affordable housing targets (more than the usual 15%) on housing sites of 25 dwellings/1HA and above;

● Adopt a rural exceptions policy

ISSUE H8 - Open Space & Amenity Areasin New Housing Developments

National and regional planning guidance arepromoting higher residential densities in theinterests of making better use of land and minimising loss of countryside. Higher densitiesare being achieved partly as a consequence ofsmall gardens; these have limited opportunitiesfor larger trees which have traditionally softened built developments over time.Furthermore current UDP policy only requiresthe provision of areas of public open space innew housing developments where the scale ofthe development allows for a useable area ofopen space. Small-scale amenity areas andincidental landscaping can be disproportionately expensive to maintain andcan be unsightly if neglected. Consequentlysmall and medium sized housing sites areincreasingly being developed with few opportunities for landscaping and softening.

Do you think that small/medium sizedhousing sites which are too small for areasof public open space should be required toinclude landscaping and amenity areaseven though this would reduce housingdensities and increase the overall amountof housing land required?

4. Housing4. Housing

2726

ISSUE H7 - Rural Housing

The provision of new open market housing inDoncaster’s rural settlements is likely to be verylimited given the government’s urban renais-sance and sustainability objectives; brownfieldhousing targets; and RPG which states that inrural areas the provision of housing should beto meet local needs and/or support local serv-ices giving priority to brownfield opportunitiesand to the conservation/enhancement of thecharacter of the village.

However it is recognised that not enough houses are being built to meet rural housingneeds and in particular rural affordable housingneeds. Rural housing is becoming increasinglyexpensive and orientated towards commuters.As a result young people and those on lowerincomes are leaving rural villages. Governmentpolicy to create/maintain balanced communities is therefore undermined.

Current UDP affordable housing policy deliversaffordable housing as an element (15% is thetarget) of all housing sites above a certain sizethreshold (25 dwellings/1HA). In rural settlements (population 3000 or less), wherethere are fewer housing sites of this size,thresholds can be lower than this provided theyare justified by local needs assessments. IfDoncaster’s housing needs survey justifies alower threshold then this could be defined andadopted through the UDP Review process andapplied to appropriate new housing allocationsor existing uncommitted sites in rural settlements.

However given the relatively small scale of theoverall rural housing allocation this approachmay still not be sufficient to meet rural needs.Increasing the proportion of affordable units oneach site above 15% may therefore be appropriate although unless a housing association is able to provide additional

subsidy or unless the land purchase price islow the market viability of some sites could beadversely affected. Again such an approachwould need to be justified by the housingneeds survey.

An alternative approach would be to provide forrural housing needs in the nearest town ratherthan in each village. The settlement pattern inDoncaster is such that affordable housingopportunities within the market and coalfieldtowns are reasonably accessible to most of theBorough’s rural areas. These towns often servetheir surrounding rural hinterland in terms ofshops, schools and other services and could tosome extent serve their identified rural affordable housing needs.

Other possibilities are limited by the restrictionson development in the countryside. Apart fromnew allocations and small-scale infill development within village development limits,new houses in rural areas are confined to agricultural dwellings (subject to strict conditions), very limited infilling of small gaps insubstantial built frontages, and residential con-versions of appropriate buildings although this isgenerally discouraged in favour of other useswhich do more to assist rural diversification.These situations are unlikely therefore to beappropriate for affordable housing.

It is of course possible for existing properties inrural settlements to be bought by housingassociations. This would not raise planningissues and indeed would meet planning objec-tives pertaining to balanced communities etc.Alternatively housing associations may excep-tionally be able to develop new affordablehousing on infill plots/windfall sites within theexisting development limits of rural settlementswithout the use of cross-subsidy.

If, after considering the scope of all these othermeans of provision, there remains a lack ofopportunities to meet rural housing needs thennational guidance permits local authorities toadopt an "exceptions policy". This allows for thedevelopment of small sites for affordable housing on the edge of villages as an exception to normal green belt/countryside pol-icy area restraint policies. Sites would need tobe otherwise environmentally suitable and development would only be for demonstratedlocal housing needs in perpetuity. Many siteson the edge of villages will not be suitable andbecause most, possibly all, potentially suitablesites would have significant hope value for market housing it is also likely that an exceptions policy would not actually delivermuch affordable housing. This is in fact theexperience nationally.

If Doncaster’s housing needs survey demonstrates the need for new approach-es to deliver rural housing needs (includ-ing affordable housing) which of the following approaches to provision do youthink the UDP should adopt?

● In small settlements (population less than3000) apply affordable housing requirements to smaller housing sites (i.e.less than the usual 25 dwellings/1 HA threshold)

● In larger settlements (which could serve surrounding rural housing needs) apply larger affordable housing targets (more than the usual 15%) on housing sites of 25 dwellings/1HA and above;

● Adopt a rural exceptions policy

ISSUE H8 - Open Space & Amenity Areasin New Housing Developments

National and regional planning guidance arepromoting higher residential densities in theinterests of making better use of land and minimising loss of countryside. Higher densitiesare being achieved partly as a consequence ofsmall gardens; these have limited opportunitiesfor larger trees which have traditionally softened built developments over time.Furthermore current UDP policy only requiresthe provision of areas of public open space innew housing developments where the scale ofthe development allows for a useable area ofopen space. Small-scale amenity areas andincidental landscaping can be disproportionately expensive to maintain andcan be unsightly if neglected. Consequentlysmall and medium sized housing sites areincreasingly being developed with few opportunities for landscaping and softening.

Do you think that small/medium sizedhousing sites which are too small for areasof public open space should be required toinclude landscaping and amenity areaseven though this would reduce housingdensities and increase the overall amountof housing land required?

5. Retail and Town Centres4. Housing

2928

ISSUE H9 - Remodelling poor housingareas

Whilst the housing market in Doncaster is generally buoyant there are a number of areasof poor housing in the Borough which areexhibiting signs of market failure with significantnumbers of vacant properties. In April 2002 theGovernment launched the Housing MarketRenewal Scheme with nine areas, includingparts of South Yorkshire, chosen as pathfindersor pilot schemes. The scheme in Doncaster willaddress areas of housing market decline andassociated problems within Mexborough,Conisbrough and Edlington.

At this stage it is unclear what the balancebetween refurbishment, demolition and clear-ance and redevelopment will be but clearly theprogramme could have potentially significantplanning issues over the plan period. Many ofthese areas were built to high densities and it isquite possible that local communities will wishto see replacement housing developments atlower densities, perhaps with more open spaceand community facilities. On the other handthere may be sustainability arguments in favourof refurbishment of some areas rather thanclearance and redevelopment.

Once the scope and scale of the programme inDoncaster has become clearer the UDP couldidentify the priority areas and make recommen-dations about redevelopment, mix of uses,density of development and so on.

How should the UDP deal with areas ofpoor housing in the Borough?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP housing policiesincluding those which:

● Promote high quality residential development through policies and standards for residential amenity, design, energy conservation, safety, disabled access, and associated community facilities. This issue is also examined in the Built Environment And Design Sectionof this Report.

● Allow non-residential use in existing residential areas only where they would not harm residential amenity

● Allow Houses In Multiple Occupation (HIMOs) only where the impact on the locality is acceptable, where there is sufficient car parking and where the size of the dwelling is sufficient for the numberof residents.

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies topromote and secure:

● Refurbishment of existing housing and improvements to poor housing areas

● Reduction in the number of vacant houses

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD3 Housing – Impact of other policies and strategies.

SD4 Residential Land Availability data.

INTRODUCTION

The existing shopping and town centre policiesin the UDP seek to contribute to all three objec-tives of economic regeneration, environmentalimprovement and social inclusion. The recenttrend has however been for out of town shop-ping. Out of town developments are popularand are part of a wide range of shoppingopportunities however they need to be balanced by town centre developments. It isnow recognised that the scale of out of towndevelopments has undermined town and district centres to some extent, directing investment elsewhere and limiting the choicefor non-car owners.

PPG6 (Town Centres and Retail Developments)and Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) seek toaddress this problem. The key objective ofPPG6 is to sustain and enhance the vitality andviability of town centres. It also seeks to main-tain an efficient, competitive and innovativeretail sector and to ensure the availability of awide range of shops, employment and otherfacilities that are easily accessible by a choiceof means of transport. The adoption of thesequential approach means that new retail andleisure developments and other key town centre uses are directed to town centre locations.

Out of centre locations are now the last optionfor new developments and are then only con-sidered acceptable if they can demonstrate need or capacity and be reachedby a choice of means of transport.

Development Plans need to establish a hierarchy of centres and establish a strategy forthe location of employment, shopping, leisure,entertainment, educational and civic uses with-in that hierarchy. Within Doncaster Borough it isrecognised that there is an existing hierarchyfrom Doncaster town centre, through Thorneand Mexborough to the smaller town and district centres in the colliery and market towns.All of these centres play a valuable role in providing facilities whilst minimising the need totravel and as such they need to be supportedin this function.

The Government’s Urban Renaissance agendahas also recognised the importance of existingtown centres and particularly seeks the revitali-sation of them. Doncaster has formed part ofYorkshire Forward’s Urban RenaissanceProgramme and the Doncaster RenaissanceTown Charter was launched in June 2002. Thiscontains a 25 year vision for the town andseeks to transform the town and Borough intoa place of genuine quality.

5. Retail and Town Centres4. Housing

2928

ISSUE H9 - Remodelling poor housingareas

Whilst the housing market in Doncaster is generally buoyant there are a number of areasof poor housing in the Borough which areexhibiting signs of market failure with significantnumbers of vacant properties. In April 2002 theGovernment launched the Housing MarketRenewal Scheme with nine areas, includingparts of South Yorkshire, chosen as pathfindersor pilot schemes. The scheme in Doncaster willaddress areas of housing market decline andassociated problems within Mexborough,Conisbrough and Edlington.

At this stage it is unclear what the balancebetween refurbishment, demolition and clear-ance and redevelopment will be but clearly theprogramme could have potentially significantplanning issues over the plan period. Many ofthese areas were built to high densities and it isquite possible that local communities will wishto see replacement housing developments atlower densities, perhaps with more open spaceand community facilities. On the other handthere may be sustainability arguments in favourof refurbishment of some areas rather thanclearance and redevelopment.

Once the scope and scale of the programme inDoncaster has become clearer the UDP couldidentify the priority areas and make recommen-dations about redevelopment, mix of uses,density of development and so on.

How should the UDP deal with areas ofpoor housing in the Borough?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP housing policiesincluding those which:

● Promote high quality residential development through policies and standards for residential amenity, design, energy conservation, safety, disabled access, and associated community facilities. This issue is also examined in the Built Environment And Design Sectionof this Report.

● Allow non-residential use in existing residential areas only where they would not harm residential amenity

● Allow Houses In Multiple Occupation (HIMOs) only where the impact on the locality is acceptable, where there is sufficient car parking and where the size of the dwelling is sufficient for the numberof residents.

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies topromote and secure:

● Refurbishment of existing housing and improvements to poor housing areas

● Reduction in the number of vacant houses

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD3 Housing – Impact of other policies and strategies.

SD4 Residential Land Availability data.

INTRODUCTION

The existing shopping and town centre policiesin the UDP seek to contribute to all three objec-tives of economic regeneration, environmentalimprovement and social inclusion. The recenttrend has however been for out of town shop-ping. Out of town developments are popularand are part of a wide range of shoppingopportunities however they need to be balanced by town centre developments. It isnow recognised that the scale of out of towndevelopments has undermined town and district centres to some extent, directing investment elsewhere and limiting the choicefor non-car owners.

PPG6 (Town Centres and Retail Developments)and Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) seek toaddress this problem. The key objective ofPPG6 is to sustain and enhance the vitality andviability of town centres. It also seeks to main-tain an efficient, competitive and innovativeretail sector and to ensure the availability of awide range of shops, employment and otherfacilities that are easily accessible by a choiceof means of transport. The adoption of thesequential approach means that new retail andleisure developments and other key town centre uses are directed to town centre locations.

Out of centre locations are now the last optionfor new developments and are then only con-sidered acceptable if they can demonstrate need or capacity and be reachedby a choice of means of transport.

Development Plans need to establish a hierarchy of centres and establish a strategy forthe location of employment, shopping, leisure,entertainment, educational and civic uses with-in that hierarchy. Within Doncaster Borough it isrecognised that there is an existing hierarchyfrom Doncaster town centre, through Thorneand Mexborough to the smaller town and district centres in the colliery and market towns.All of these centres play a valuable role in providing facilities whilst minimising the need totravel and as such they need to be supportedin this function.

The Government’s Urban Renaissance agendahas also recognised the importance of existingtown centres and particularly seeks the revitali-sation of them. Doncaster has formed part ofYorkshire Forward’s Urban RenaissanceProgramme and the Doncaster RenaissanceTown Charter was launched in June 2002. Thiscontains a 25 year vision for the town andseeks to transform the town and Borough intoa place of genuine quality.

5. Retail and Town Centres

3130

KEY FACTS

● Doncaster town Centre containsapproximately 1 million square feet of shopping floor space. The proposed extension to the Frenchgate Shopping Centre will add 300,000 sq ft of shopping space

● All the sites identified for out-of-town food and non-food retail within the existing UDP have been developed.

● Doncaster’s 2001 retail capacity study shows that there will be no capacity for significant additional food or conveniencegoods floor space in the Borough up to 2011 except possibly a very small numberof small or medium sized supermarkets tomeet specific needs.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Sustain and enhance the vitality and viability of town centres.

● Maintain a competitive and innovative retail sector with a wide range of shops, employment and other facilities that are easily accessible by a choice of means oftransport.

● Adopt a sequential approach to new retail, leisure and other key town centre uses so as to direct them to town centre locations.

● Out of centre locations are only acceptable if they can demonstrate need and bereached by a choice of means of transport.

● Establish a hierarchy of centres and a strategy for the location of employment, shopping, leisure, entertainment, education and civic uses within that hierarchy.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Recognises the existing hierarchy from Doncaster town centre, through Thorne and Mexborough to the smaller town and district centres in the colliery and market towns.

● Provides sufficient capacity for out-of-town food and non-food shopping facilities up to 2011 but includes no sequential policy

● Protects the retail function of prime and secondary shopping streets in Doncaster Town Centre

● Identifies and promotes the redevelopment of a number of development opportunity sites in Town Centres

ISSUE RTC1 - Retail Provision in the Borough.

The review of the UDP needs to look at shoppingprovision in the Borough and assess whetherthere will be a need for additional retail develop-ment and if so how and where it should beaccommodated.

People’s shopping patterns have changed signif-icantly over recent years and the town centre isno longer the only location for retailing. Relianceon the car has led to a growth in popularity of outof town retailing both for food and non-foodgoods. PPG6 seeks to address this trend andaims to sustain and enhance the vitality and via-

bility of town centres. It advises that town anddistrict centres should be the preferred locationsfor developments that attract many trips. Asequential approach needs to be adopted forselecting sites for new retail development with allpotential town centre locations being thoroughlyassessed before less central locations are inves-tigated. This approach is supported by RPG,which recognises that additional out of centre regional or sub-regional shopping facilities willput at risk the vitality and viability of our towncentres. All new retail and leisure developmentsshould be directed to town centres followed byedge of centre locations.

In line with national trends a number of out oftown retail parks and stores have been developed throughout Doncaster Borough. All the sites identified for retail warehousing withinthe existing UDP have been developed (althoughnot all fully occupied). New supermarkets havebeen opened (Tesco Extra at WoodfieldPlantation) and existing stores have been extend-ed (Sainsbury’s at Edenthorpe) or have permis-sion to be extended (Asda at Bawtry Road).

It is recognised that these out of town food andnon-food stores are a vital and popular part ofmodern shopping patterns but in line withGovernment Guidance there is a need to alsoprotect the vitality and viability of existing towncentres so that their unique appeal and accessibility are not undermined. Planning policy therefore seeks to strike a balancebetween town and out of town shopping location. Up to date retail capacity forecasts canassist in this process.

The Council instructed CB Hillier Parker inOctober 2000 to undertake a new retail capacity study in the Borough to assist in estab-lishing the need for additional retail development in the Borough. The terms of reference for the Study included: -

● Preparing up to date forecasts of the capacity for additional retail floorspace (including store extensions) in the Borough covering the period up to 2011;

● Assessing the spatial pattern of shopping in the Borough to assess whether there are any parts of the catchment area where the market shares of expenditure attracted are particularly low;

● Undertaking a retail sector analysis to assess whether any particular retail sectors are under represented in the town centres or elsewhere in the Borough.

● Assessing retail and service business demand;

● Advising on the need for further retail development in the Borough in both quantitative and qualitative terms.

The Study identifies that there is already a widerange of modern foodstores in the Borough,including food superstores, discount supermarkets, town centre supermarkets andspecialist food outlets at Doncaster Market.These existing facilities already meet community requirements. The retail capacity fore-casts show that there will be no capacity for sig-nificant additional food and convenience goodsfloorspace in the Borough during the forecastingperiod up to 2011. The only exception to this may be the provision of a verysmall number of small or medium sized supermarkets to remedy areas of deficiencywhere access to food stores is limited or to actas local shopping centres for major new housing areas.

5. Retail and Town Centres

3130

KEY FACTS

● Doncaster town Centre containsapproximately 1 million square feet of shopping floor space. The proposed extension to the Frenchgate Shopping Centre will add 300,000 sq ft of shopping space

● All the sites identified for out-of-town food and non-food retail within the existing UDP have been developed.

● Doncaster’s 2001 retail capacity study shows that there will be no capacity for significant additional food or conveniencegoods floor space in the Borough up to 2011 except possibly a very small numberof small or medium sized supermarkets tomeet specific needs.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Sustain and enhance the vitality and viability of town centres.

● Maintain a competitive and innovative retail sector with a wide range of shops, employment and other facilities that are easily accessible by a choice of means oftransport.

● Adopt a sequential approach to new retail, leisure and other key town centre uses so as to direct them to town centre locations.

● Out of centre locations are only acceptable if they can demonstrate need and bereached by a choice of means of transport.

● Establish a hierarchy of centres and a strategy for the location of employment, shopping, leisure, entertainment, education and civic uses within that hierarchy.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Recognises the existing hierarchy from Doncaster town centre, through Thorne and Mexborough to the smaller town and district centres in the colliery and market towns.

● Provides sufficient capacity for out-of-town food and non-food shopping facilities up to 2011 but includes no sequential policy

● Protects the retail function of prime and secondary shopping streets in Doncaster Town Centre

● Identifies and promotes the redevelopment of a number of development opportunity sites in Town Centres

ISSUE RTC1 - Retail Provision in the Borough.

The review of the UDP needs to look at shoppingprovision in the Borough and assess whetherthere will be a need for additional retail develop-ment and if so how and where it should beaccommodated.

People’s shopping patterns have changed signif-icantly over recent years and the town centre isno longer the only location for retailing. Relianceon the car has led to a growth in popularity of outof town retailing both for food and non-foodgoods. PPG6 seeks to address this trend andaims to sustain and enhance the vitality and via-

bility of town centres. It advises that town anddistrict centres should be the preferred locationsfor developments that attract many trips. Asequential approach needs to be adopted forselecting sites for new retail development with allpotential town centre locations being thoroughlyassessed before less central locations are inves-tigated. This approach is supported by RPG,which recognises that additional out of centre regional or sub-regional shopping facilities willput at risk the vitality and viability of our towncentres. All new retail and leisure developmentsshould be directed to town centres followed byedge of centre locations.

In line with national trends a number of out oftown retail parks and stores have been developed throughout Doncaster Borough. All the sites identified for retail warehousing withinthe existing UDP have been developed (althoughnot all fully occupied). New supermarkets havebeen opened (Tesco Extra at WoodfieldPlantation) and existing stores have been extend-ed (Sainsbury’s at Edenthorpe) or have permis-sion to be extended (Asda at Bawtry Road).

It is recognised that these out of town food andnon-food stores are a vital and popular part ofmodern shopping patterns but in line withGovernment Guidance there is a need to alsoprotect the vitality and viability of existing towncentres so that their unique appeal and accessibility are not undermined. Planning policy therefore seeks to strike a balancebetween town and out of town shopping location. Up to date retail capacity forecasts canassist in this process.

The Council instructed CB Hillier Parker inOctober 2000 to undertake a new retail capacity study in the Borough to assist in estab-lishing the need for additional retail development in the Borough. The terms of reference for the Study included: -

● Preparing up to date forecasts of the capacity for additional retail floorspace (including store extensions) in the Borough covering the period up to 2011;

● Assessing the spatial pattern of shopping in the Borough to assess whether there are any parts of the catchment area where the market shares of expenditure attracted are particularly low;

● Undertaking a retail sector analysis to assess whether any particular retail sectors are under represented in the town centres or elsewhere in the Borough.

● Assessing retail and service business demand;

● Advising on the need for further retail development in the Borough in both quantitative and qualitative terms.

The Study identifies that there is already a widerange of modern foodstores in the Borough,including food superstores, discount supermarkets, town centre supermarkets andspecialist food outlets at Doncaster Market.These existing facilities already meet community requirements. The retail capacity fore-casts show that there will be no capacity for sig-nificant additional food and convenience goodsfloorspace in the Borough during the forecastingperiod up to 2011. The only exception to this may be the provision of a verysmall number of small or medium sized supermarkets to remedy areas of deficiencywhere access to food stores is limited or to actas local shopping centres for major new housing areas.

5. Retail and Town Centres

3332

The study also identifies that Doncaster isalready served by a wide range of retail ware-houses and is already competitive with othermajor towns in the Region for out of centreshopping opportunities. There is an over-supplyof this type of retail development and becauseof this there will be no capacity for any furtherout of centre development, either in retail ware-houses or extensions to the Yorkshire Outletwithin the period to 2011. It is considered thatany additional out of centre retail developmentwould have an adverse impact on the towncentre and would result in the closure of exist-ing town centre stores.

Do you agree that no new sites should beallocated through the UDP Review foreither large new foodstores or out of townnon-food retailing and that new retaildevelopment (non-food and small foodstores) should be directed to existing Townand District Centres?

ISSUE RTC2 - Provision of New Small Shops OutsideTown and District Centres and ShoppingParades.

There is a tradition of small ‘corner ‘ shopsserving the needs of local communities andensuring that everyone has easy access toeveryday convenience goods. These smallshops provide an important service outsideexisting established shopping areas and allowfor shopping trips without the need for trans-port. The existing UDP recognises the impor-tant role that these facilities fulfil and containspolicies to encourage new small shops in areaswhere there is a local need and particularly inareas of substantial population and housinggrowth or where there are no shops within areasonable walking distance.

The definition of a small shop needs to be clearand unambiguous however to ensure that theyserve the purpose for which they are intendedand do not serve a wider function to the detri-ment of existing district shopping centres. Thedefinition of a small shop in the existing UDP isa shop that has a floorspace of not more than1200 square metres gross floor area. This is arelatively large amount of floorspace and gen-erally exceeds the size of the traditional smallshop. Some established supermarket retailers,especially at the discount end of the market,have standard store formats that fall below thisfloorspace threshold. These stores normallyhave generous car parking and a substantialamount of trade comes from car borne cus-tomers. Stores of this size serve more than thelocal need and will impact on existing town anddistrict centres and impact on local residentialamenity.

Whilst it is considered important therefore thatsmall shops are still encouraged, especially inareas deficient in local facilities, the floorspacethreshold should be significantly reduced toensure that new shops serve only local needand do not attract car borne custom from awider catchment area to the detriment of thevitality and viability of existing town and districtcentres. This will ensure that proposals for newsupermarkets that currently fall within the ‘smallshop’ definition will no longer do so and will beassessed against the key tests set out inPPG6: -

● Impact on the Development Plan Strategy

● Impact on the Vitality and Viability of Existing Centres

● Accessibility by a Choice of Means of Transport

● Impact on Travel Patterns and Car Use

Do you agree that new small shops outsidetown and district centres and existingshopping parades should be confined togenuinely small shops (no more than100sq metres) designed to serve locallyidentified needs only?

ISSUE RTC3 - Defining Doncaster Town Centre

PPG6 advocates a sequential approach forselecting sites for retail development and keytown centre uses that attract a lot of people,such as commercial and public offices, enter-tainment and leisure facilities. The sequentialapproach means that the first preferenceshould be for town centre sites followed byedge of centre sites (an edge of centre site isdetermined by what is an easy walking dis-tance for shoppers walking to or away from astore carrying shopping. Generally it is accept-ed that shoppers are unlikely to want to walkmore than 200 – 300 metres.), district and localcentres and only then out of centre locationsthat are accessible by a choice of means oftransport. To support this approach thereneeds to be a clear understanding of the areathat constitutes the town centre.

The existing UDP currently identifies Doncastertown centre on Proposals Map 1. This area isbounded by Carr House Road to the south andthe River Don to the north, the railway to thewest and includes a large area of housing tothe east. This area extends beyond what wouldbe traditionally called the town centre. The towncentre is more accurately reflected by the

Shopping/Office Policy Area as defined on theProposals Map and existing policies directmajor shopping proposals to this Area.

In addition to the UDP under Objective One anIntegrated Development Plan (IDP) has beenproduced for the Urban Centre of Doncaster.The IDP sets out the vision and strategy for theUrban Centre and identifies major projectssuch as The Waterfront, Waterdale andLakeside that will be delivered throughObjective One. The Urban Centre as defined inthe IDP covers a large area extending from theRiver Don to the north and includes Town Moorand the Lakeside area to the south.

It is therefore recognised that presently theremay be some confusion surrounding the geo-graphical extent of the town centre, particularlyin the context of PPG6 and the sequentialapproach. It is considered that neither theUrban Centre nor the area identified onProposals Map 1 can be described as the towncentre as they both cover a large area andextend some distance beyond the existing retailcore. Using the edge of centre definition fromPPG6 as a guide (i.e. shoppers are not gener-ally prepared to walk much more than 300metres) it is clear that the town centre bound-ary should be drawn around a relatively smallarea. To permit traditional town centre usesover a large geographical area would be to thedetriment of the existing retail areas of the townand would detract from the vitality and viabilityof this area.

5. Retail and Town Centres

3332

The study also identifies that Doncaster isalready served by a wide range of retail ware-houses and is already competitive with othermajor towns in the Region for out of centreshopping opportunities. There is an over-supplyof this type of retail development and becauseof this there will be no capacity for any furtherout of centre development, either in retail ware-houses or extensions to the Yorkshire Outletwithin the period to 2011. It is considered thatany additional out of centre retail developmentwould have an adverse impact on the towncentre and would result in the closure of exist-ing town centre stores.

Do you agree that no new sites should beallocated through the UDP Review foreither large new foodstores or out of townnon-food retailing and that new retaildevelopment (non-food and small foodstores) should be directed to existing Townand District Centres?

ISSUE RTC2 - Provision of New Small Shops OutsideTown and District Centres and ShoppingParades.

There is a tradition of small ‘corner ‘ shopsserving the needs of local communities andensuring that everyone has easy access toeveryday convenience goods. These smallshops provide an important service outsideexisting established shopping areas and allowfor shopping trips without the need for trans-port. The existing UDP recognises the impor-tant role that these facilities fulfil and containspolicies to encourage new small shops in areaswhere there is a local need and particularly inareas of substantial population and housinggrowth or where there are no shops within areasonable walking distance.

The definition of a small shop needs to be clearand unambiguous however to ensure that theyserve the purpose for which they are intendedand do not serve a wider function to the detri-ment of existing district shopping centres. Thedefinition of a small shop in the existing UDP isa shop that has a floorspace of not more than1200 square metres gross floor area. This is arelatively large amount of floorspace and gen-erally exceeds the size of the traditional smallshop. Some established supermarket retailers,especially at the discount end of the market,have standard store formats that fall below thisfloorspace threshold. These stores normallyhave generous car parking and a substantialamount of trade comes from car borne cus-tomers. Stores of this size serve more than thelocal need and will impact on existing town anddistrict centres and impact on local residentialamenity.

Whilst it is considered important therefore thatsmall shops are still encouraged, especially inareas deficient in local facilities, the floorspacethreshold should be significantly reduced toensure that new shops serve only local needand do not attract car borne custom from awider catchment area to the detriment of thevitality and viability of existing town and districtcentres. This will ensure that proposals for newsupermarkets that currently fall within the ‘smallshop’ definition will no longer do so and will beassessed against the key tests set out inPPG6: -

● Impact on the Development Plan Strategy

● Impact on the Vitality and Viability of Existing Centres

● Accessibility by a Choice of Means of Transport

● Impact on Travel Patterns and Car Use

Do you agree that new small shops outsidetown and district centres and existingshopping parades should be confined togenuinely small shops (no more than100sq metres) designed to serve locallyidentified needs only?

ISSUE RTC3 - Defining Doncaster Town Centre

PPG6 advocates a sequential approach forselecting sites for retail development and keytown centre uses that attract a lot of people,such as commercial and public offices, enter-tainment and leisure facilities. The sequentialapproach means that the first preferenceshould be for town centre sites followed byedge of centre sites (an edge of centre site isdetermined by what is an easy walking dis-tance for shoppers walking to or away from astore carrying shopping. Generally it is accept-ed that shoppers are unlikely to want to walkmore than 200 – 300 metres.), district and localcentres and only then out of centre locationsthat are accessible by a choice of means oftransport. To support this approach thereneeds to be a clear understanding of the areathat constitutes the town centre.

The existing UDP currently identifies Doncastertown centre on Proposals Map 1. This area isbounded by Carr House Road to the south andthe River Don to the north, the railway to thewest and includes a large area of housing tothe east. This area extends beyond what wouldbe traditionally called the town centre. The towncentre is more accurately reflected by the

Shopping/Office Policy Area as defined on theProposals Map and existing policies directmajor shopping proposals to this Area.

In addition to the UDP under Objective One anIntegrated Development Plan (IDP) has beenproduced for the Urban Centre of Doncaster.The IDP sets out the vision and strategy for theUrban Centre and identifies major projectssuch as The Waterfront, Waterdale andLakeside that will be delivered throughObjective One. The Urban Centre as defined inthe IDP covers a large area extending from theRiver Don to the north and includes Town Moorand the Lakeside area to the south.

It is therefore recognised that presently theremay be some confusion surrounding the geo-graphical extent of the town centre, particularlyin the context of PPG6 and the sequentialapproach. It is considered that neither theUrban Centre nor the area identified onProposals Map 1 can be described as the towncentre as they both cover a large area andextend some distance beyond the existing retailcore. Using the edge of centre definition fromPPG6 as a guide (i.e. shoppers are not gener-ally prepared to walk much more than 300metres) it is clear that the town centre bound-ary should be drawn around a relatively smallarea. To permit traditional town centre usesover a large geographical area would be to thedetriment of the existing retail areas of the townand would detract from the vitality and viabilityof this area.

3534

Do you agree that the definition ofDoncaster town centre should be restrict-ed to the retail core (including the pro-posed extension to the Frenchgate Centreas part of the Interchange Development)?

ISSUE RTC4 – Primary and Secondary ShoppingFrontages

The existing UDP contains policies that seek toprotect the retail function in both the primaryand secondary shopping areas of the town.Within primary shopping frontages (theFrenchgate Centre, Frenchgate, Baxtergate, StSepulchre Gate and Printing office Street) it isconsidered that the predominant retail functionshould be protected with only limited changesof use of ground floor shops to Class A2(Professional and Financial Services) and ClassA3 (Food and Drink) uses permitted. The policydoes not however clarify the meaning of ‘limited’. Within secondary shopping frontages(Hallgate, Silver Street, Scot Lane, ClevelandStreet and the Waterdale area) the policy aimsto retain the majority of the frontage in retailuse, changes of use are permitted providedthey attract passing trade. As a guide 50% isthe maximum proportion of non-retail uses thatshould be permitted in secondary shoppingfrontages.

It is accepted that the shopping function in theprimary shopping area should be supportedand promoted. The areas that are currentlyidentified in the UDP as primary shoppingfrontage do in the main still form the retail coreof the town centre (although this may alter withthe development of the Interchange) and con-tinue to attract retailers into shop units as theybecome vacant. In order to continue to protectthe retail function the existing policy could bestrengthened and a limit expressed as to the

level of non-retail use that would be permittedin these locations. This could assist in consoli-dating the retail core of the town.

However the secondary shopping areas arestruggling to attract and maintain their retailfunction, particularly in locations some distanceaway from the retail core. With the develop-ment of the Interchange, which includes anextension to the Frenchgate Centre and pro-vides an additional 300,000sq feet of retailfloorspace, the retail core will be consolidatedto the north west of the town centre. It will beincreasingly difficult to attract retailers to thesecondary areas. This is a common trendreflected in virtually all towns across the countryand reflects changing shopping patterns andother socio-economic factors.

These secondary shopping areas do howeverattract non-retail uses which contribute to thevitality and viability of the town centre and thereis increasing pressure to allow more than 50%of the frontage to be released for other uses.These areas could perform an alternative func-tion as business and entertainment areas withsome residential, particularly on upper floors.One option may be to reduce the area of thesecondary shopping frontages and restrictthem to the streets immediately adjacent to theprimary shopping area and introduce a newmixed-use designation to the more peripherallocations that allows appropriate non-retailuses.

Do you agree that the shopping frontage designations should be revised to reflectchanges in shopping patterns?

Should a new ‘mixed-use’ designation be introduced that allows appropriatechanges of use to non-retail uses toreplace the more peripheral secondaryshopping frontage designations?

ISSUE RTC5 – Pubs in Doncaster Town Centre

Properties in the secondary shopping areas ofthe town have in recent years attracted planning applications for Class A3 use (Foodand Drink). In particular applications have beenreceived to change the use of properties topubs, this has been especially prevalent onHallgate and Silver Street.

PPG6 advises that local planning authoritiesshould encourage diversification of uses in thetown centre. Whilst protecting and supportingthe retail function of the primary shopping areadifferent, but complementary uses, during theday and in the evening, should be encouragedas they can support each other and as a resultmake town centres more attractive.

Whilst it is important that the primary retailareas are protected and changes of use tonon-retail uses (including pubs) are resisted itis recognised that in some secondary areas ofthe town new pubs can contribute to, ratherthan detract from, the vitality and viability of thetown in a number of ways: -

● Investment in the building fabric

● Occupying buildings for which there may be little or no retail demand

● Generating pedestrian flows comparable to or greater than retail alternatives

● Providing café and restaurant facilities at different times of the day

It is recognised however that there can beproblems of noise and anti-social behaviourassociated with some pubs, particularly onFriday and Saturday evenings, although it isprobably fair to say that perception varies

particularly with age group. Many of theseissues can however be considered andaddressed strategically through planning, polic-ing, environmental health legislation, licensingand town centre management. One method ofdealing with some of the problems may be torequire pubs through planning agreements to contribute to street cleaning for example.

Which of these issues do you associatewith the pubs located in the secondaryshopping areas of the town (Hallgate,Silver Street, Scot Lane, Cleveland Street)?Please list all those you feel apply on theresponse form.

● Investment in the town centre

● Improved and attractive buildings

● Contribute to the vitality and viability of thetown

● Loud music

● Anti-social behaviour

● Reducing opportunities for retail developments

● Using buildings that would otherwise remain empty

● Increase the food and drink offer in the town during the day

● Important leisure opportunities

5. Retail and Town Centres 5. Retail and Town Centres

3534

Do you agree that the definition ofDoncaster town centre should be restrict-ed to the retail core (including the pro-posed extension to the Frenchgate Centreas part of the Interchange Development)?

ISSUE RTC4 – Primary and Secondary ShoppingFrontages

The existing UDP contains policies that seek toprotect the retail function in both the primaryand secondary shopping areas of the town.Within primary shopping frontages (theFrenchgate Centre, Frenchgate, Baxtergate, StSepulchre Gate and Printing office Street) it isconsidered that the predominant retail functionshould be protected with only limited changesof use of ground floor shops to Class A2(Professional and Financial Services) and ClassA3 (Food and Drink) uses permitted. The policydoes not however clarify the meaning of ‘limited’. Within secondary shopping frontages(Hallgate, Silver Street, Scot Lane, ClevelandStreet and the Waterdale area) the policy aimsto retain the majority of the frontage in retailuse, changes of use are permitted providedthey attract passing trade. As a guide 50% isthe maximum proportion of non-retail uses thatshould be permitted in secondary shoppingfrontages.

It is accepted that the shopping function in theprimary shopping area should be supportedand promoted. The areas that are currentlyidentified in the UDP as primary shoppingfrontage do in the main still form the retail coreof the town centre (although this may alter withthe development of the Interchange) and con-tinue to attract retailers into shop units as theybecome vacant. In order to continue to protectthe retail function the existing policy could bestrengthened and a limit expressed as to the

level of non-retail use that would be permittedin these locations. This could assist in consoli-dating the retail core of the town.

However the secondary shopping areas arestruggling to attract and maintain their retailfunction, particularly in locations some distanceaway from the retail core. With the develop-ment of the Interchange, which includes anextension to the Frenchgate Centre and pro-vides an additional 300,000sq feet of retailfloorspace, the retail core will be consolidatedto the north west of the town centre. It will beincreasingly difficult to attract retailers to thesecondary areas. This is a common trendreflected in virtually all towns across the countryand reflects changing shopping patterns andother socio-economic factors.

These secondary shopping areas do howeverattract non-retail uses which contribute to thevitality and viability of the town centre and thereis increasing pressure to allow more than 50%of the frontage to be released for other uses.These areas could perform an alternative func-tion as business and entertainment areas withsome residential, particularly on upper floors.One option may be to reduce the area of thesecondary shopping frontages and restrictthem to the streets immediately adjacent to theprimary shopping area and introduce a newmixed-use designation to the more peripherallocations that allows appropriate non-retailuses.

Do you agree that the shopping frontage designations should be revised to reflectchanges in shopping patterns?

Should a new ‘mixed-use’ designation be introduced that allows appropriatechanges of use to non-retail uses toreplace the more peripheral secondaryshopping frontage designations?

ISSUE RTC5 – Pubs in Doncaster Town Centre

Properties in the secondary shopping areas ofthe town have in recent years attracted planning applications for Class A3 use (Foodand Drink). In particular applications have beenreceived to change the use of properties topubs, this has been especially prevalent onHallgate and Silver Street.

PPG6 advises that local planning authoritiesshould encourage diversification of uses in thetown centre. Whilst protecting and supportingthe retail function of the primary shopping areadifferent, but complementary uses, during theday and in the evening, should be encouragedas they can support each other and as a resultmake town centres more attractive.

Whilst it is important that the primary retailareas are protected and changes of use tonon-retail uses (including pubs) are resisted itis recognised that in some secondary areas ofthe town new pubs can contribute to, ratherthan detract from, the vitality and viability of thetown in a number of ways: -

● Investment in the building fabric

● Occupying buildings for which there may be little or no retail demand

● Generating pedestrian flows comparable to or greater than retail alternatives

● Providing café and restaurant facilities at different times of the day

It is recognised however that there can beproblems of noise and anti-social behaviourassociated with some pubs, particularly onFriday and Saturday evenings, although it isprobably fair to say that perception varies

particularly with age group. Many of theseissues can however be considered andaddressed strategically through planning, polic-ing, environmental health legislation, licensingand town centre management. One method ofdealing with some of the problems may be torequire pubs through planning agreements to contribute to street cleaning for example.

Which of these issues do you associatewith the pubs located in the secondaryshopping areas of the town (Hallgate,Silver Street, Scot Lane, Cleveland Street)?Please list all those you feel apply on theresponse form.

● Investment in the town centre

● Improved and attractive buildings

● Contribute to the vitality and viability of thetown

● Loud music

● Anti-social behaviour

● Reducing opportunities for retail developments

● Using buildings that would otherwise remain empty

● Increase the food and drink offer in the town during the day

● Important leisure opportunities

5. Retail and Town Centres 5. Retail and Town Centres

3736

ISSUE RTC6 – Town Centre Transformational Projects

The Retail Capacity Study undertaken by HillierParker identified that there have been few newdurable (non-food) goods retail developmentsin the town centre over recent years and assuch there is now a strong need for a majornew town centre development to safeguard thelong term future of the town centre as a sub-regional shopping centre.

The Interchange Development which forms anextension to the Frenchgate Centre andincludes an additional 300,000sq feet of retailfloorspace will provide purpose built retail unitswhich are attractive to national retailers. Thedevelopment has already secured Debenhamsas an anchor tenant. This development willtherefore improve the retail offer in the towncentre and will assist in consolidatingDoncaster’s position in the regional shoppinghierarchy. Other new non-food retail develop-ments will continue to be promoted in the pri-mary shopping areas of the town centre.

The importance of Doncaster Market to thetown centre is also recognised. The refurbish-ment of the market’s area is considered a prior-ity and forms an integral part of the town centremasterplanning work that is currently being car-ried out by Urban Initiatives as part of theUrban Renaissance programme.

The masterplanning work also involves theWaterdale area as the establishment of thispart of the town as a cultural and creativeindustries quarter centred round a NewPerformance Venue. The Waterfront area(Greyfriars Road, Chappell Drive and landaround Gas House Bight) will also be redevel-oped with a mix of education, residential andcommercial buildings within a high quality envi-ronment.

The Interchange, the Market, Waterdaleand Waterfront are the Council’s majortransformational projects for DoncasterTown Centre. Are there any other areas ofthe town that need developing or regenerating?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP retail and town centrepolicies including those which:

● Seek to secure and enhance the vitality and viability of small town and district shopping centres

● Restrict the type of goods sold in retail warehousing areas

● Allow hot food takeaways in areas where they would not harm residential amenity

● Seek to maintain and enhance Doncaster town centre’s role as a shopping and commercial centre

● Promote improvements to pedestrian safety and public transport around the town centre

● Promote and encourage good quality development and enhancements to the public realm

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies topromote and secure:

● An expansion of the town centre management function to other towns within the Borough

● A continuation of the Quality Streets Initiative within the town centre

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD5 Retail and Town Centres – Impact of other policies and strategies.

SD6 Summary of Doncaster Retail Capacity Study

5. Retail and Town Centres

3736

ISSUE RTC6 – Town Centre Transformational Projects

The Retail Capacity Study undertaken by HillierParker identified that there have been few newdurable (non-food) goods retail developmentsin the town centre over recent years and assuch there is now a strong need for a majornew town centre development to safeguard thelong term future of the town centre as a sub-regional shopping centre.

The Interchange Development which forms anextension to the Frenchgate Centre andincludes an additional 300,000sq feet of retailfloorspace will provide purpose built retail unitswhich are attractive to national retailers. Thedevelopment has already secured Debenhamsas an anchor tenant. This development willtherefore improve the retail offer in the towncentre and will assist in consolidatingDoncaster’s position in the regional shoppinghierarchy. Other new non-food retail develop-ments will continue to be promoted in the pri-mary shopping areas of the town centre.

The importance of Doncaster Market to thetown centre is also recognised. The refurbish-ment of the market’s area is considered a prior-ity and forms an integral part of the town centremasterplanning work that is currently being car-ried out by Urban Initiatives as part of theUrban Renaissance programme.

The masterplanning work also involves theWaterdale area as the establishment of thispart of the town as a cultural and creativeindustries quarter centred round a NewPerformance Venue. The Waterfront area(Greyfriars Road, Chappell Drive and landaround Gas House Bight) will also be redevel-oped with a mix of education, residential andcommercial buildings within a high quality envi-ronment.

The Interchange, the Market, Waterdaleand Waterfront are the Council’s majortransformational projects for DoncasterTown Centre. Are there any other areas ofthe town that need developing or regenerating?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP retail and town centrepolicies including those which:

● Seek to secure and enhance the vitality and viability of small town and district shopping centres

● Restrict the type of goods sold in retail warehousing areas

● Allow hot food takeaways in areas where they would not harm residential amenity

● Seek to maintain and enhance Doncaster town centre’s role as a shopping and commercial centre

● Promote improvements to pedestrian safety and public transport around the town centre

● Promote and encourage good quality development and enhancements to the public realm

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies topromote and secure:

● An expansion of the town centre management function to other towns within the Borough

● A continuation of the Quality Streets Initiative within the town centre

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD5 Retail and Town Centres – Impact of other policies and strategies.

SD6 Summary of Doncaster Retail Capacity Study

5. Retail and Town Centres

6. Built Environment and Design

3938

INTRODUCTION

Doncaster Borough has a very diverse settle-ment pattern which includes the urban area ofDoncaster town with its town centre, traditionaland modern employment areas and suburbs.There is also a range of other settlement typessuch as small manufacturing and markettowns, mining villages, agricultural and dormi-tory villages and numerous hamlets and farm-steads throughout the borough. Within thisframework is a huge variety of building typesrepresenting a succession of styles frommedieval to modern. Much of the built patternof the borough arose from the impact of min-ing, manufacturing and railways in the 19th andearly 20th centuries. Since then, urban expan-sion has continued, mainly residential andemployment, reflecting the changing styles ofpost-war development, from high-rise to medi-um density low-rise.

Significantly, the borough’s built environment isunderpinned by a high quality historic corewhich is present in many of our settlementsand which is often supported by ConservationArea status. There are around 800 listed build-ings and structures in the borough, and over 40Conservation Areas.

In the review of the UDP the council intends topay particular attention to design of the builtenvironment by dealing with these issues as aspecific topic rather than dispersing the subjectthroughout the UDP.

KEY FACTS

● Doncaster Borough includes a very diverse settlement pattern with urban and suburban areas, mining and market towns, agricultural and dormitory villages, hamlets and farmsteads. Within this framework is a huge variety of building types representing a succession of styles from medieval to modern

● There are 41 Conservation Areas, approximately 800 Listed Buildings and 48 Scheduled Ancient Monuments.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● UDPs should include policies to bring about an urban renaissance based on having a ‘vision’ for the built environment.

● UDPs should include policies for the protection of the existing built heritage and to promote quality design in new buildings and places.

● The development sector must demonstrate how it has taken account of the need for good design in its proposals

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Promotes environmental quality as a major precondition to economic regeneration and promotes good design in a general rather than in a specific or detailed manner

● Includes policies to conserve and enhance conservation areas and to protect listed buildings and archaeological interests.

ISSUE BED 1 - Building design inDoncaster

Doncaster is similar to most other towns in thecountry in that it has grown and responded todevelopment pressures which have resulted invarying architectural styles and building quality.Doncaster and its towns and villages grew rap-idly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries,retaining a local vernacular style of building.

Since World War 2, there has been a buildingboom which has swept away some of our old,attractive buildings and replaced them withbuildings which sometimes have proved to beunpopular and unattractive. In addition therehas been much new housing development inour villages and suburbs which often lacksarchitectural quality. Questions of scale andeconomy pose problems in achieving qualityarchitecture, for example in the case of distribu-tion warehouses and other large buildings.

It is perhaps true to say that in architecture,styles change but quality endures in the long-run. A principle of sustainability is that newbuildings should be built to last and be adapt-able to changing needs.

The Council promotes good architecturethrough its Design Award Scheme and UDPpolicy but it is clear that there is much morethat can be done

There is in fact no reason why all new buildingin the Borough cannot be of the highest quality.Doncaster has some very fine buildings andurban places which are exemplars of the verybest in architecture. The two main constrainingfactors to achieving this are the need for theCouncil and community to understand clearlywhat constitutes good architecture and a will-ingness for the Council, through the planningsystem in Doncaster to demand the very best.

Are you satisfied with the overall architec-tural quality of new development inDoncaster?

If not, how do you think the UDP reviewcould improve the situation?

ISSUE BED 2- Defining a Vision for the Borough’s BuiltEnvironment

High quality design as a contributor to anurban renaissance is not just about buildingsbut also the spaces in between them and all ofthe paraphernalia which goes to make up ourtowns and villages. The borough prides itselfon having some very high quality and attractiveplaces, not to mention landscapes, but thereare also some quite run-down parts of the bor-ough which deserve improvement. The currentUDP sees environmental quality as a majorprecondition to economic regeneration andpolicy therefore continues to promote the high-est standards in new development. The councilitself has initiated many improvement schemessuch as ‘Quality Streets’ in pursuit of this basicpolicy and there are many examples of gooddesign from the private sector which are to thebenefit of the borough’s built environment. Thecouncil in partnership with Yorkshire Forwardand the community has produced a 25 yearvision, ‘The Doncaster Renaissance TownCharter 2002’, setting out how the town centrecan be developed and regenerated to create atruly great place that people can be proud of.This type of approach can be applied to othercommunities in the borough.

The latest advice encourages councils to devel-op policy aimed at bringing about this renais-sance based on having a ‘vision’ for the builtenvironment. Some places have already definedtheir vision based on a clear understanding ofthe character and aspirations of their area.

For example, Leicester is the environment city(green issues), Leeds, the 24-hour city (vitality)and Bristol, the legible city (easy movement ofpeople). Such an emphasis needs to be reflect-ed in the UDP’s urban design objectives andhave regard to the council’s corporate vision,which includes a commitment to UrbanRenaissance as a Transformational Goal.

6. Built Environment and Design

3938

INTRODUCTION

Doncaster Borough has a very diverse settle-ment pattern which includes the urban area ofDoncaster town with its town centre, traditionaland modern employment areas and suburbs.There is also a range of other settlement typessuch as small manufacturing and markettowns, mining villages, agricultural and dormi-tory villages and numerous hamlets and farm-steads throughout the borough. Within thisframework is a huge variety of building typesrepresenting a succession of styles frommedieval to modern. Much of the built patternof the borough arose from the impact of min-ing, manufacturing and railways in the 19th andearly 20th centuries. Since then, urban expan-sion has continued, mainly residential andemployment, reflecting the changing styles ofpost-war development, from high-rise to medi-um density low-rise.

Significantly, the borough’s built environment isunderpinned by a high quality historic corewhich is present in many of our settlementsand which is often supported by ConservationArea status. There are around 800 listed build-ings and structures in the borough, and over 40Conservation Areas.

In the review of the UDP the council intends topay particular attention to design of the builtenvironment by dealing with these issues as aspecific topic rather than dispersing the subjectthroughout the UDP.

KEY FACTS

● Doncaster Borough includes a very diverse settlement pattern with urban and suburban areas, mining and market towns, agricultural and dormitory villages, hamlets and farmsteads. Within this framework is a huge variety of building types representing a succession of styles from medieval to modern

● There are 41 Conservation Areas, approximately 800 Listed Buildings and 48 Scheduled Ancient Monuments.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● UDPs should include policies to bring about an urban renaissance based on having a ‘vision’ for the built environment.

● UDPs should include policies for the protection of the existing built heritage and to promote quality design in new buildings and places.

● The development sector must demonstrate how it has taken account of the need for good design in its proposals

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Promotes environmental quality as a major precondition to economic regeneration and promotes good design in a general rather than in a specific or detailed manner

● Includes policies to conserve and enhance conservation areas and to protect listed buildings and archaeological interests.

ISSUE BED 1 - Building design inDoncaster

Doncaster is similar to most other towns in thecountry in that it has grown and responded todevelopment pressures which have resulted invarying architectural styles and building quality.Doncaster and its towns and villages grew rap-idly in the late 19th and early 20th centuries,retaining a local vernacular style of building.

Since World War 2, there has been a buildingboom which has swept away some of our old,attractive buildings and replaced them withbuildings which sometimes have proved to beunpopular and unattractive. In addition therehas been much new housing development inour villages and suburbs which often lacksarchitectural quality. Questions of scale andeconomy pose problems in achieving qualityarchitecture, for example in the case of distribu-tion warehouses and other large buildings.

It is perhaps true to say that in architecture,styles change but quality endures in the long-run. A principle of sustainability is that newbuildings should be built to last and be adapt-able to changing needs.

The Council promotes good architecturethrough its Design Award Scheme and UDPpolicy but it is clear that there is much morethat can be done

There is in fact no reason why all new buildingin the Borough cannot be of the highest quality.Doncaster has some very fine buildings andurban places which are exemplars of the verybest in architecture. The two main constrainingfactors to achieving this are the need for theCouncil and community to understand clearlywhat constitutes good architecture and a will-ingness for the Council, through the planningsystem in Doncaster to demand the very best.

Are you satisfied with the overall architec-tural quality of new development inDoncaster?

If not, how do you think the UDP reviewcould improve the situation?

ISSUE BED 2- Defining a Vision for the Borough’s BuiltEnvironment

High quality design as a contributor to anurban renaissance is not just about buildingsbut also the spaces in between them and all ofthe paraphernalia which goes to make up ourtowns and villages. The borough prides itselfon having some very high quality and attractiveplaces, not to mention landscapes, but thereare also some quite run-down parts of the bor-ough which deserve improvement. The currentUDP sees environmental quality as a majorprecondition to economic regeneration andpolicy therefore continues to promote the high-est standards in new development. The councilitself has initiated many improvement schemessuch as ‘Quality Streets’ in pursuit of this basicpolicy and there are many examples of gooddesign from the private sector which are to thebenefit of the borough’s built environment. Thecouncil in partnership with Yorkshire Forwardand the community has produced a 25 yearvision, ‘The Doncaster Renaissance TownCharter 2002’, setting out how the town centrecan be developed and regenerated to create atruly great place that people can be proud of.This type of approach can be applied to othercommunities in the borough.

The latest advice encourages councils to devel-op policy aimed at bringing about this renais-sance based on having a ‘vision’ for the builtenvironment. Some places have already definedtheir vision based on a clear understanding ofthe character and aspirations of their area.

For example, Leicester is the environment city(green issues), Leeds, the 24-hour city (vitality)and Bristol, the legible city (easy movement ofpeople). Such an emphasis needs to be reflect-ed in the UDP’s urban design objectives andhave regard to the council’s corporate vision,which includes a commitment to UrbanRenaissance as a Transformational Goal.

6. Built Environment and Design

4140

What should Doncaster’s urban designvision be and should it be Borough-wide orlocalised?

ISSUE BED 3 - Defining Urban Design Objectives forDoncaster

Government advice set out in ‘By Design’ ( DETR/CABE 2000) suggests that successfulstreets, spaces, villages, towns and cities tendto have characteristics in common and can beexpressed as principles or objectives of goodurban design and help to define what shouldbe sought to create a successful place. The ‘ByDesign’ urban design objectives are as follows:-

● Character – a place with its own identity● Continuity and Enclosure – a place where

public and private places are clearly distinguished

● Quality of the Public Realm – a place with attractive and successful outdoor areas

● Ease of Movement – a place that is easy to get to and move through

● Legibility – a place that has a clear image and is easy to understand

● Adaptability – a place that can change easily

● Diversity – a place with variety and choice

The council takes the view that these objectivesshould form the basis of developing urbandesign policy in the UDP.

Do you agree that the ‘By Design’ objectives should form the basis of UDPurban design policy?

If not, what do you think the objectivesshould be?

ISSUE BED 4 - Developing Design Policies to Deliver anUrban Renaissance in Doncaster

The government places the planning system atthe forefront of improving the quality of oururban areas in terms of the design of buildings,spaces and places. It also puts an onus on thedevelopment sector for ensuring that new development respects its surroundings. Gooddesign should be the aim of all those involved inthe development process. The most recentresearch has shown that good urban designadds economic, social and environmental value.

The Council promotes good design through itsDesign Awards Scheme.

In the case of Doncaster, there is a mixed experience of good urban design. We are ableto point to some examples of genuinely gooddesign but there are also instances of thatwhich is mundane. One of the remedies to thisis the authoritative intervention of the planningsystem in providing design guidance and resolving design issues at the pre-planningapplication stage.

The latest advice is that for the planning system to be effective in securing good urbandesign, development plans must set out anappropriately detailed but essentially non-pre-scriptive design policy base.

Such policies need to be supported by designbriefs, urban design strategies and masterplans. This level of guidance gives certainty tothe development sector and expresses clearlythe borough’s aspirations for an urban renaissance. The UDP promotes quality design in generalbut provides little detailed guidance to influ-ence and control development.

A further question arises as to who should produce the guidance. It is more and more thecase that local people and people with an interest in an area are getting involved in thepreparation of plans and guidance for thefuture development of their communities. For example, Village Design Statements andthe Doncaster Renaissance Town Charter havebeen prepared by local people with access toexpertise.

The council believes that it is important toset down urban design principles and provide detailed design policy guidance tofulfil its aspirations for achieving a highquality environment throughout the borough. Do you agree?

If so, which aspects of the built environment need design guidance?Please prioritise.

Is it important that local people and stakeholders are involved in the preparation of design guidance for theircommunities?

ISSUE BED 5 - A Different Approach toResidential Development

The government has made it quite clear that it isunsustainable to continue to develop onGreenfield sites and at comparatively low densi-ties. The implication of this is that we must look toour existing urban areas and previously devel-oped sites to accommodate future growth and topromote higher densities, particularly in residentialdevelopments. A century ago densities were quitehigh but by the 1950’s this trend was reversed.Since then the trend has been more towardshigher densities. Government policies will quicken this trend,encouraging densities of between 30-50dwellings per hectare net, with higher densitiesclose to town centres.

Some people associate higher residential densitywith poorer living conditions but modern designsand layouts are tending to show that this neednot be the case. At the moment there are fewmodern examples of new high density housing inthe borough although they exist in many otherplaces in the UK. The UDP needs promote higherdensity housing whilst at the same time ensuringthat new developments offer residents the highestpossible living standards.

Connected with this policy direction is the issue ofpromoting new residential developments whichput the needs of the pedestrian over those of themotorist. Central to this is the need to reduce off-street residential parking spaces to an average ofno more than 1.5 spaces per dwelling. There ismuch current advice on designing residentialenvironments which are pedestrian friendly, easyto move about in, with access to services and arewell designed with mixtures of densities.

The South Yorkshire local authorities have com-missioned consultants to prepare guidance onthe design of residential streets in the context ofthe latest government advice. Of course, the resi-dential environment is not just about streets, italso includes layout, building design, landscapingand open space. Government advises that newdevelopments should be locally distinctive ratherthan reflecting patterns common throughout theUK.

Should Doncaster have its own distinctiveresidential development guide?

ISSUE BED 6 - Promoting SustainableDevelopment and Design

The current UDP promotes sustainable develop-ment but does not provide a detailed basis forachieving sustainability in the built environment.It does not provide the detailed guidance todevelop the principles of sustainable develop-ment. There is no doubt that this issue is movingup the government’s agenda.

6. Built Environment and Design

4140

What should Doncaster’s urban designvision be and should it be Borough-wide orlocalised?

ISSUE BED 3 - Defining Urban Design Objectives forDoncaster

Government advice set out in ‘By Design’ ( DETR/CABE 2000) suggests that successfulstreets, spaces, villages, towns and cities tendto have characteristics in common and can beexpressed as principles or objectives of goodurban design and help to define what shouldbe sought to create a successful place. The ‘ByDesign’ urban design objectives are as follows:-

● Character – a place with its own identity● Continuity and Enclosure – a place where

public and private places are clearly distinguished

● Quality of the Public Realm – a place with attractive and successful outdoor areas

● Ease of Movement – a place that is easy to get to and move through

● Legibility – a place that has a clear image and is easy to understand

● Adaptability – a place that can change easily

● Diversity – a place with variety and choice

The council takes the view that these objectivesshould form the basis of developing urbandesign policy in the UDP.

Do you agree that the ‘By Design’ objectives should form the basis of UDPurban design policy?

If not, what do you think the objectivesshould be?

ISSUE BED 4 - Developing Design Policies to Deliver anUrban Renaissance in Doncaster

The government places the planning system atthe forefront of improving the quality of oururban areas in terms of the design of buildings,spaces and places. It also puts an onus on thedevelopment sector for ensuring that new development respects its surroundings. Gooddesign should be the aim of all those involved inthe development process. The most recentresearch has shown that good urban designadds economic, social and environmental value.

The Council promotes good design through itsDesign Awards Scheme.

In the case of Doncaster, there is a mixed experience of good urban design. We are ableto point to some examples of genuinely gooddesign but there are also instances of thatwhich is mundane. One of the remedies to thisis the authoritative intervention of the planningsystem in providing design guidance and resolving design issues at the pre-planningapplication stage.

The latest advice is that for the planning system to be effective in securing good urbandesign, development plans must set out anappropriately detailed but essentially non-pre-scriptive design policy base.

Such policies need to be supported by designbriefs, urban design strategies and masterplans. This level of guidance gives certainty tothe development sector and expresses clearlythe borough’s aspirations for an urban renaissance. The UDP promotes quality design in generalbut provides little detailed guidance to influ-ence and control development.

A further question arises as to who should produce the guidance. It is more and more thecase that local people and people with an interest in an area are getting involved in thepreparation of plans and guidance for thefuture development of their communities. For example, Village Design Statements andthe Doncaster Renaissance Town Charter havebeen prepared by local people with access toexpertise.

The council believes that it is important toset down urban design principles and provide detailed design policy guidance tofulfil its aspirations for achieving a highquality environment throughout the borough. Do you agree?

If so, which aspects of the built environment need design guidance?Please prioritise.

Is it important that local people and stakeholders are involved in the preparation of design guidance for theircommunities?

ISSUE BED 5 - A Different Approach toResidential Development

The government has made it quite clear that it isunsustainable to continue to develop onGreenfield sites and at comparatively low densi-ties. The implication of this is that we must look toour existing urban areas and previously devel-oped sites to accommodate future growth and topromote higher densities, particularly in residentialdevelopments. A century ago densities were quitehigh but by the 1950’s this trend was reversed.Since then the trend has been more towardshigher densities. Government policies will quicken this trend,encouraging densities of between 30-50dwellings per hectare net, with higher densitiesclose to town centres.

Some people associate higher residential densitywith poorer living conditions but modern designsand layouts are tending to show that this neednot be the case. At the moment there are fewmodern examples of new high density housing inthe borough although they exist in many otherplaces in the UK. The UDP needs promote higherdensity housing whilst at the same time ensuringthat new developments offer residents the highestpossible living standards.

Connected with this policy direction is the issue ofpromoting new residential developments whichput the needs of the pedestrian over those of themotorist. Central to this is the need to reduce off-street residential parking spaces to an average ofno more than 1.5 spaces per dwelling. There ismuch current advice on designing residentialenvironments which are pedestrian friendly, easyto move about in, with access to services and arewell designed with mixtures of densities.

The South Yorkshire local authorities have com-missioned consultants to prepare guidance onthe design of residential streets in the context ofthe latest government advice. Of course, the resi-dential environment is not just about streets, italso includes layout, building design, landscapingand open space. Government advises that newdevelopments should be locally distinctive ratherthan reflecting patterns common throughout theUK.

Should Doncaster have its own distinctiveresidential development guide?

ISSUE BED 6 - Promoting SustainableDevelopment and Design

The current UDP promotes sustainable develop-ment but does not provide a detailed basis forachieving sustainability in the built environment.It does not provide the detailed guidance todevelop the principles of sustainable develop-ment. There is no doubt that this issue is movingup the government’s agenda.

7. Mixed Use Development

4342

There is much that can be done to promote sus-tainable design and development and this isparticularly relevant in Doncaster’s case, havingEarth Centre on its doorstep as an exemplar.This is a real opportunity for Doncaster to be acentre for sustainable development and design.The recent Renaissance Towns Initiativedemonstrated that there is much local interestin promoting sustainable development.

In response to this, the council wants to setdown sustainable design and developmentprinciples dealing with issues such as renew-able energy, sustainable design and materials,energy efficiency and insulation, layout,drainage and recycling techniques.

Do you agree that the UDP should containmore detailed policies to promote sustain-able development and design?

If you do agree, which areas of sustainabil-ity should the policy focus on?

ISSUE BED 7 - Employment and Commercial Areas

Doncaster’s traditional industrial and commer-cial base has changed dramatically over thelast couple of decades with the virtual loss ofthe mining industry and decline of manufactur-ing. New employment sectors are emerging,with different locational demands. Large siteswith motorway connections are now favoured.New employment development is often now ona different scale than previously, with largebuildings set in landscaped sites, reflecting thedemands of the commercial market. Examplesat Doncaster Carr and Redhouse are typical.These modern solutions can sometimes seemalien and difficult to integrate easily into thebuilt and natural environment. It is importantthat employment and commercial areas arejust as safe, accessible and pleasing to be inas town centres and residential areas. At themoment, the council has no detail design guid-ance to influence this development sector

although the South Yorkshire Objective 1Programme Directorate has prepared guidancefor the South Yorkshire sub-region. In the faceof further demand for modern employmentpremises and sites the Council consider itdesirable to provide further guidance.

Do you agree that further detailed designguidance is needed for employment development?

If you do, what do you think are the essential elements of design that suchguidance should focus upon?

ISSUE BED 8 - The Historic Built Environment

Doncaster can boast of an historic built environment as good as many in the UK andthe Council takes steps to protect and enhanceit through policy and active intervention. TheUDP already sets out a comprehensive rangeof conservation and protection policies that areconsidered to be successful in this respect.

Do you feel that the current UDP providesa sound basis to protect and enhance thehistoric built environment?

If not, which particular issues do you thinkneed further consideration?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardexisting UDP policies:

● to protect listed buildings, conservation areas and scheduled ancient monuments.

● policies encouraging the reclamation or improvement of derelict or degraded landand buildings.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD7 Built Environment and Design – Impact of other policies

● As we move towards a post-industrial society there is more opportunity to put back the mix of uses which create vitality and diversity without compromising amenity.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

Government guidance in a range of PlanningPolicy Guidance Notes promotes mixed-usedevelopment as helping to create vitality anddiversity and reducing the need to travel. It isalso more sustainable. PPGs 1, 3, 6 and 13 areparticularly noteworthy in this respect.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

The UDP recognises the value of mixed-usedevelopment in creating regenerated townsand villages and sets out in Chapter 16 aseries of site-specific policies aimed at secur-ing mixes at large and small-scale to this end.Chapter 15 promotes mixed use developmentin the town centre. However, the UDP does notgive the detailed guidance or encouragementto secure finer grained mixed use in more gen-eral urban situations as advised in PPGs. Thisneeds to be remedied in the Review.

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, many parts of our built environment have developed incrementally witha variety of different uses to make up vibrantand dynamic areas of towns and cities. It isincreasingly recognised that developmentwhich introduces a broad mix of uses canrecreate this sense of vitality that is often missing from modern developments, and helpto create attractive and successful parts of thebuilt environment.The government recognisesthe value of mixed-use and encourages localauthorities and developers to take every opportunity to create such places.

KEY FACTS

● In 1850, Doncaster town’s population of 10,000 was contained almost entirely within the area bounded by the River Don,East Laithe Gate, South Parade and St Sepulchre Gate West. This residential element was part of an intensive mix of uses including commercial, retail, industrial and leisure.

● Before the major urban expansions of the 20th century, towns tended traditionally to have mixes of uses in compact centres. Later development practice usually separated out individual land uses to create the housing developments, industrial estates and shopping areas familiar in most towns. This was for very good reasons, mostly because of the incompatible nature of the uses.

7. Mixed Use Development

4342

There is much that can be done to promote sus-tainable design and development and this isparticularly relevant in Doncaster’s case, havingEarth Centre on its doorstep as an exemplar.This is a real opportunity for Doncaster to be acentre for sustainable development and design.The recent Renaissance Towns Initiativedemonstrated that there is much local interestin promoting sustainable development.

In response to this, the council wants to setdown sustainable design and developmentprinciples dealing with issues such as renew-able energy, sustainable design and materials,energy efficiency and insulation, layout,drainage and recycling techniques.

Do you agree that the UDP should containmore detailed policies to promote sustain-able development and design?

If you do agree, which areas of sustainabil-ity should the policy focus on?

ISSUE BED 7 - Employment and Commercial Areas

Doncaster’s traditional industrial and commer-cial base has changed dramatically over thelast couple of decades with the virtual loss ofthe mining industry and decline of manufactur-ing. New employment sectors are emerging,with different locational demands. Large siteswith motorway connections are now favoured.New employment development is often now ona different scale than previously, with largebuildings set in landscaped sites, reflecting thedemands of the commercial market. Examplesat Doncaster Carr and Redhouse are typical.These modern solutions can sometimes seemalien and difficult to integrate easily into thebuilt and natural environment. It is importantthat employment and commercial areas arejust as safe, accessible and pleasing to be inas town centres and residential areas. At themoment, the council has no detail design guid-ance to influence this development sector

although the South Yorkshire Objective 1Programme Directorate has prepared guidancefor the South Yorkshire sub-region. In the faceof further demand for modern employmentpremises and sites the Council consider itdesirable to provide further guidance.

Do you agree that further detailed designguidance is needed for employment development?

If you do, what do you think are the essential elements of design that suchguidance should focus upon?

ISSUE BED 8 - The Historic Built Environment

Doncaster can boast of an historic built environment as good as many in the UK andthe Council takes steps to protect and enhanceit through policy and active intervention. TheUDP already sets out a comprehensive rangeof conservation and protection policies that areconsidered to be successful in this respect.

Do you feel that the current UDP providesa sound basis to protect and enhance thehistoric built environment?

If not, which particular issues do you thinkneed further consideration?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardexisting UDP policies:

● to protect listed buildings, conservation areas and scheduled ancient monuments.

● policies encouraging the reclamation or improvement of derelict or degraded landand buildings.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD7 Built Environment and Design – Impact of other policies

● As we move towards a post-industrial society there is more opportunity to put back the mix of uses which create vitality and diversity without compromising amenity.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

Government guidance in a range of PlanningPolicy Guidance Notes promotes mixed-usedevelopment as helping to create vitality anddiversity and reducing the need to travel. It isalso more sustainable. PPGs 1, 3, 6 and 13 areparticularly noteworthy in this respect.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

The UDP recognises the value of mixed-usedevelopment in creating regenerated townsand villages and sets out in Chapter 16 aseries of site-specific policies aimed at secur-ing mixes at large and small-scale to this end.Chapter 15 promotes mixed use developmentin the town centre. However, the UDP does notgive the detailed guidance or encouragementto secure finer grained mixed use in more gen-eral urban situations as advised in PPGs. Thisneeds to be remedied in the Review.

INTRODUCTION

Traditionally, many parts of our built environment have developed incrementally witha variety of different uses to make up vibrantand dynamic areas of towns and cities. It isincreasingly recognised that developmentwhich introduces a broad mix of uses canrecreate this sense of vitality that is often missing from modern developments, and helpto create attractive and successful parts of thebuilt environment.The government recognisesthe value of mixed-use and encourages localauthorities and developers to take every opportunity to create such places.

KEY FACTS

● In 1850, Doncaster town’s population of 10,000 was contained almost entirely within the area bounded by the River Don,East Laithe Gate, South Parade and St Sepulchre Gate West. This residential element was part of an intensive mix of uses including commercial, retail, industrial and leisure.

● Before the major urban expansions of the 20th century, towns tended traditionally to have mixes of uses in compact centres. Later development practice usually separated out individual land uses to create the housing developments, industrial estates and shopping areas familiar in most towns. This was for very good reasons, mostly because of the incompatible nature of the uses.

8. Countryside and Rural Communities

4544

ISSUE MU1 - General Mixed-UseDevelopments

The government promotes mixed-use developments as a means of creating vitalityand diversity and reducing the need to travel.This can be more sustainable than single uses.We are advised to include policies in the UDPto this effect.

Mixed use nowadays means a finer grain ofuses including retail, residential, offices, com-munity uses, industry with low amenity impactand open space.

Opportunities to achieve this will exist in areas designated for urban expansion or major development. It is also necessary to considerthe desirability of promoting mixed-use in ourlarger outlying villages as a means of protecting and enhancing their vitality and viability.

The review of the UDP should identify individualsites where development should incorporate amixture of uses, with a suitable justification,and itemise those uses considered desirable.Appropriate locations would be areas highlyaccessible by means other than the private carand in areas of major new development but it ispossible to develop this theme in existing areasby the gradual introduction of mixed use ele-ments based on a detailed strategy.

Do you support the principle of a policythat promotes the development of mixed-uses in major new residential areas and inestablished areas such as suburbs and vil-lages?

Should the UDP provide detailed guidanceon achieving mixed-use development?

ISSUE MU2 – Mixed-Use in Town Centres

Town centres have traditionally been charac-terised by a mix of uses, but as towns haveexpanded, this mix has been diluted, often atthe expense of residential and industrial useswhich have moved to the edge of town. Theloss of residential uses is particularly apparentwhen shops and business premises close andareas of the centre lose their vitality in theevening.

Government advice suggests that a mixture ofsmall businesses, houses or offices in or neartown centres and the occupation of flats aboveshops, can increase activity and therefore per-sonal safety whilst ensuring buildings are keptin good repair. In such cases there is a need totake a flexible approach to car parking stan-dards.

There is already some residential accommoda-tion in the town centre but there are opportuni-ties to secure more through providing clearerpolicy and design guidance and encouragingresidential uses in new developments onvacant sites and by conversion of redundantoffice space.

Should the Council continue to encouragemixed-uses in town centres as a means ofpromoting vitality and regeneration?

Should the UDP provide detailed guidanceon how successful mixes of use can beachieved in town centres?

INTRODUCTION

Rural issues have had a high profile recentlynotably because of Foot & Mouth, BSE andThe Countryside Alliance campaign but alsobecause of the Government’s Rural WhitePaper, the formation of the Countryside Agencyand the ongoing debate about the direction ofthe European Common Agricultural Policy.

Despite being a metropolitan urban authority,the largest land use in Doncaster is agriculture;large parts of the Borough are rural in characterwith some attractive (originally agricultural) villages and large swathes of attractive countryside. Many of Doncaster’s colliery andformer colliery villages are also physically separate from the main urban core and whilstperhaps neither rural nor urban they are in certain respects self-contained independentcommunities.

Whilst few of these areas can be regarded asparticularly remote (and large parts have thecharacteristics of urban fringe) the issuesfacing Doncaster’s rural areas warrant specific

attention. This has been reflected by variousinitiatives in the recent past including the RuralDevelopment Area status afforded to a largearea in the north and north-east of theBorough, the Coalfields Community Campaign,the Market Towns Initiative (in Thorne), variousrural public and community transport initiatives,and the application of a number of Governmentand European grants with a rural dimensionsuch as certain rounds of the SingleRegeneration Budget and some of the meas-ures included in Objective1. These aim to tack-le a diverse range of socio-economic and envi-ronmental problems directly through variousfunding regimes and partnership arrange-ments.

Many of the socio-economic and environmentalissues facing the former colliery villages arevery different from those facing the moretraditional agricultural villages and commutervillages but there are a number of planningissues common to all or most of Doncaster’srural settlements including:

● Green belt or countryside policy area settings;

● A lack of local jobs due to the decline in agricultural and mining industries leading to commuting or unemployment;

● Poor access to the trunk road network leading to lack of interest from potential economic investors;

● A lack of accessibility to services leading to social exclusion or undesirably long journeys for those services (often by car);

● A lack of availability or affordability of local housing.

The UDP alone cannot solve the socio-eco-nomic issues affecting rural areas but it willprovide the necessary land use-planningcontext for other strategies and the work of var-ious agencies and partnerships.

8. Countryside and Rural Communities

4544

ISSUE MU1 - General Mixed-UseDevelopments

The government promotes mixed-use developments as a means of creating vitalityand diversity and reducing the need to travel.This can be more sustainable than single uses.We are advised to include policies in the UDPto this effect.

Mixed use nowadays means a finer grain ofuses including retail, residential, offices, com-munity uses, industry with low amenity impactand open space.

Opportunities to achieve this will exist in areas designated for urban expansion or major development. It is also necessary to considerthe desirability of promoting mixed-use in ourlarger outlying villages as a means of protecting and enhancing their vitality and viability.

The review of the UDP should identify individualsites where development should incorporate amixture of uses, with a suitable justification,and itemise those uses considered desirable.Appropriate locations would be areas highlyaccessible by means other than the private carand in areas of major new development but it ispossible to develop this theme in existing areasby the gradual introduction of mixed use ele-ments based on a detailed strategy.

Do you support the principle of a policythat promotes the development of mixed-uses in major new residential areas and inestablished areas such as suburbs and vil-lages?

Should the UDP provide detailed guidanceon achieving mixed-use development?

ISSUE MU2 – Mixed-Use in Town Centres

Town centres have traditionally been charac-terised by a mix of uses, but as towns haveexpanded, this mix has been diluted, often atthe expense of residential and industrial useswhich have moved to the edge of town. Theloss of residential uses is particularly apparentwhen shops and business premises close andareas of the centre lose their vitality in theevening.

Government advice suggests that a mixture ofsmall businesses, houses or offices in or neartown centres and the occupation of flats aboveshops, can increase activity and therefore per-sonal safety whilst ensuring buildings are keptin good repair. In such cases there is a need totake a flexible approach to car parking stan-dards.

There is already some residential accommoda-tion in the town centre but there are opportuni-ties to secure more through providing clearerpolicy and design guidance and encouragingresidential uses in new developments onvacant sites and by conversion of redundantoffice space.

Should the Council continue to encouragemixed-uses in town centres as a means ofpromoting vitality and regeneration?

Should the UDP provide detailed guidanceon how successful mixes of use can beachieved in town centres?

INTRODUCTION

Rural issues have had a high profile recentlynotably because of Foot & Mouth, BSE andThe Countryside Alliance campaign but alsobecause of the Government’s Rural WhitePaper, the formation of the Countryside Agencyand the ongoing debate about the direction ofthe European Common Agricultural Policy.

Despite being a metropolitan urban authority,the largest land use in Doncaster is agriculture;large parts of the Borough are rural in characterwith some attractive (originally agricultural) villages and large swathes of attractive countryside. Many of Doncaster’s colliery andformer colliery villages are also physically separate from the main urban core and whilstperhaps neither rural nor urban they are in certain respects self-contained independentcommunities.

Whilst few of these areas can be regarded asparticularly remote (and large parts have thecharacteristics of urban fringe) the issuesfacing Doncaster’s rural areas warrant specific

attention. This has been reflected by variousinitiatives in the recent past including the RuralDevelopment Area status afforded to a largearea in the north and north-east of theBorough, the Coalfields Community Campaign,the Market Towns Initiative (in Thorne), variousrural public and community transport initiatives,and the application of a number of Governmentand European grants with a rural dimensionsuch as certain rounds of the SingleRegeneration Budget and some of the meas-ures included in Objective1. These aim to tack-le a diverse range of socio-economic and envi-ronmental problems directly through variousfunding regimes and partnership arrange-ments.

Many of the socio-economic and environmentalissues facing the former colliery villages arevery different from those facing the moretraditional agricultural villages and commutervillages but there are a number of planningissues common to all or most of Doncaster’srural settlements including:

● Green belt or countryside policy area settings;

● A lack of local jobs due to the decline in agricultural and mining industries leading to commuting or unemployment;

● Poor access to the trunk road network leading to lack of interest from potential economic investors;

● A lack of accessibility to services leading to social exclusion or undesirably long journeys for those services (often by car);

● A lack of availability or affordability of local housing.

The UDP alone cannot solve the socio-eco-nomic issues affecting rural areas but it willprovide the necessary land use-planningcontext for other strategies and the work of var-ious agencies and partnerships.

8. Countryside and Rural Communities8. Countryside and Rural Communities

4746

KEY FACTS

● Doncaster Borough covers 225 square miles and is the largest metropolitanborough in the country by area. 67% of the land is in agricultural use. The countryside in the western "half" of the Borough is Green Belt.

● There are 15 Sites of Special Scientific Interest and approximately 300 sites of local nature conservation importance. Thorne and Hatfield Moors are of International Importance. 300 Tree Preservation Orders cover a large numberof individual trees and woodlands and there are 2290 kilometres of hedgerows including many ancient hedgerows

.● Many smaller villages in Doncaster have

no local facilities whilst many others are down to their last pub or shop.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Retain the existing green belt and protect the countryside here and elsewhere in theBorough for the sake of its landscape, wildlife, agriculture, amenity and natural resources

● Provide for sustainable development which meets the economic and social needs of people who live and work in rural areas whilst maintaining and enhancing the character of the countryside.

● Direct development to urban areas including the coalfield and market towns; rural development elsewhere should be tomeet local needs and/or support local services.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Establishes and defines the green belt in the western "half" of Doncaster and the "Countryside Policy Area" in the eastern "half" of the Borough together with the necessary policies to control development

● Defines and protects sites of international,national and regional/local importance for nature conservation; areas of special landscape value; parks and gardens of historic interest

● Includes policies to protect trees, hedgerows and other elements of thenatural heritage as well as policies to allow for rural diversification consistent with conservation of the countryside

● Defines development envelopes around urban areas and all but the smallestvillages and hamlets

ISSUE CRC 1 – Green Belt and New Allocations

Doncaster’s countryside in the western "half" ofthe Borough is already designated as GreenBelt. National and Regional Planning Guidancestress that neither this general extent, nor thedetailed boundaries, should be altered unlessthere are exceptional circumstances. The Council does not envisage any circum-stances which would justify an alteration to thegeneral extent of the Green belt but a casemay be made for limited new employment allocations on current Green Belt land to fullyrealise the economic growth opportunities provided by Doncaster’s motorway connec-tions or in order to provide certain settlements(such as Mexborough, Conisbrough, Edlingtonand Askern) with immediately local job opportunities.

The justification for such a case would howeverneed to have regard to a number of factors:

● There are existing undeveloped motorwayrelated employment sites in the Borough;

● There are accessible employment sites in the Dearne just outside the Borough boundary;

● New motorway employment opportunities could be provided in the east of the Borough without the need to lose Green Belt;

● Providing better access to jobs (through green commuter plans, quality bus corridor initiatives etc.) may be a more sustainable strategy than trying to provideemployment sites physically close to settlements distant from motorway junctions;

● Some rural towns and villages have poor access to trunk roads and are therefore unlikely to be attractive to potential investors);

● Some motorway junction sites are not wellintegrated with the urban fabric or very accessible to communities and may also be subject to various environmental constraints.

Do you think that new employment sitesshould be provided on green belt land ifeconomic growth would otherwise be constrained?

ISSUE CRC 2 – Countryside Policy Area and NewAllocations

The countryside in the eastern "half" ofDoncaster is designated as "Countryside PolicyArea" and is more suitable than the Green Beltfor new development allocations through theReview of the UDP. Such allocations may benecessary for new employment, housing orcommunity facilities and will need to be justifiedthrough the UDP Review process. The suitabili-ty and scale of such allocations is addressedfurther elsewhere in this report but will be needto comply with the RPG regional spatial strate-gy which requires a sequential approach tomeeting development needs. Other factors thatmay influence the scale and distribution ofdevelopment include: the availability of suitablebrownfield land, environmental and physicalconstraints (including flood potential); theopportunities afforded through Objective1 particularly within the M18 Strategic EconomicZone; and the Finningley Airport proposal.

The settlement pattern in Doncaster is suchthat few people live in truly remote areas; mostsettlements lie within the hinterland of theDoncaster urban core and there are strongurban renaissance and sustainability argu-ments for concentrating most new develop-ment in this core and focussing on quality sustainable transport links from it to the ruralsettlements.

8. Countryside and Rural Communities8. Countryside and Rural Communities

4746

KEY FACTS

● Doncaster Borough covers 225 square miles and is the largest metropolitanborough in the country by area. 67% of the land is in agricultural use. The countryside in the western "half" of the Borough is Green Belt.

● There are 15 Sites of Special Scientific Interest and approximately 300 sites of local nature conservation importance. Thorne and Hatfield Moors are of International Importance. 300 Tree Preservation Orders cover a large numberof individual trees and woodlands and there are 2290 kilometres of hedgerows including many ancient hedgerows

.● Many smaller villages in Doncaster have

no local facilities whilst many others are down to their last pub or shop.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Retain the existing green belt and protect the countryside here and elsewhere in theBorough for the sake of its landscape, wildlife, agriculture, amenity and natural resources

● Provide for sustainable development which meets the economic and social needs of people who live and work in rural areas whilst maintaining and enhancing the character of the countryside.

● Direct development to urban areas including the coalfield and market towns; rural development elsewhere should be tomeet local needs and/or support local services.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Establishes and defines the green belt in the western "half" of Doncaster and the "Countryside Policy Area" in the eastern "half" of the Borough together with the necessary policies to control development

● Defines and protects sites of international,national and regional/local importance for nature conservation; areas of special landscape value; parks and gardens of historic interest

● Includes policies to protect trees, hedgerows and other elements of thenatural heritage as well as policies to allow for rural diversification consistent with conservation of the countryside

● Defines development envelopes around urban areas and all but the smallestvillages and hamlets

ISSUE CRC 1 – Green Belt and New Allocations

Doncaster’s countryside in the western "half" ofthe Borough is already designated as GreenBelt. National and Regional Planning Guidancestress that neither this general extent, nor thedetailed boundaries, should be altered unlessthere are exceptional circumstances. The Council does not envisage any circum-stances which would justify an alteration to thegeneral extent of the Green belt but a casemay be made for limited new employment allocations on current Green Belt land to fullyrealise the economic growth opportunities provided by Doncaster’s motorway connec-tions or in order to provide certain settlements(such as Mexborough, Conisbrough, Edlingtonand Askern) with immediately local job opportunities.

The justification for such a case would howeverneed to have regard to a number of factors:

● There are existing undeveloped motorwayrelated employment sites in the Borough;

● There are accessible employment sites in the Dearne just outside the Borough boundary;

● New motorway employment opportunities could be provided in the east of the Borough without the need to lose Green Belt;

● Providing better access to jobs (through green commuter plans, quality bus corridor initiatives etc.) may be a more sustainable strategy than trying to provideemployment sites physically close to settlements distant from motorway junctions;

● Some rural towns and villages have poor access to trunk roads and are therefore unlikely to be attractive to potential investors);

● Some motorway junction sites are not wellintegrated with the urban fabric or very accessible to communities and may also be subject to various environmental constraints.

Do you think that new employment sitesshould be provided on green belt land ifeconomic growth would otherwise be constrained?

ISSUE CRC 2 – Countryside Policy Area and NewAllocations

The countryside in the eastern "half" ofDoncaster is designated as "Countryside PolicyArea" and is more suitable than the Green Beltfor new development allocations through theReview of the UDP. Such allocations may benecessary for new employment, housing orcommunity facilities and will need to be justifiedthrough the UDP Review process. The suitabili-ty and scale of such allocations is addressedfurther elsewhere in this report but will be needto comply with the RPG regional spatial strate-gy which requires a sequential approach tomeeting development needs. Other factors thatmay influence the scale and distribution ofdevelopment include: the availability of suitablebrownfield land, environmental and physicalconstraints (including flood potential); theopportunities afforded through Objective1 particularly within the M18 Strategic EconomicZone; and the Finningley Airport proposal.

The settlement pattern in Doncaster is suchthat few people live in truly remote areas; mostsettlements lie within the hinterland of theDoncaster urban core and there are strongurban renaissance and sustainability argu-ments for concentrating most new develop-ment in this core and focussing on quality sustainable transport links from it to the ruralsettlements.

8. Countryside and Rural Communities

4948

National and regional planning guidanceemphasise the urban renaissance agenda, thebrownfield housing target and the searchsequence for new housing sites; the regionalspatial strategy states that "wherever possibledevelopment should be located in urban areas".It is clear that the scale of new rural develop-ment in Doncaster is likely to very limited.

On the other hand RPG states that market andcoalfield towns are, and should continue to be,the main focus for developing local servicesand employment in the rural/coalfield areasand that some modest and sensitive expansionmay be justified where it would support regeneration and/or service provision (includingpublic transport) and infrastructure (includingincreasingly important information and communications technology (ICT) infrastructure). This may also be true of suchsettlements in the Green Belt but there wouldalso need to be exceptional circumstances tojustify such development-see Issue CRC1.

RPG further states that in rural areas the provision of housing should be to meet localneeds and/or support local services giving priority to brownfield opportunities and to theconservation and enhancement of the character of the settlement. Apart from coalfieldand market towns some villages also provideschools and other services to nearby villages.

Residential expansion of smaller villages whichlack services tends to do little to support existing, or generate new, services but doestend to lead to more commuting and longerjourneys for services and can have a dispro-portionately adverse impact on the character ofa village. Most villages are nevertheless popular places to live and attract pressure forresidential development. This can raise localaffordable housing needs issues (see HousingIssues Section).

Do you think that new development inDoncaster’s rural areas should be:

(a) Confined to infilling within the existing development limits of rural towns and villages? or

(b) As in a) but also with some modest expansion of market and coalfield towns where it would support regeneration and/or local housing needs and services? or

(c) As in a) and b) but also with some small scale residential expansion of service villages to meet local needs including affordable housing needs and to support services?

ISSUE CRC 3 – Development Within theCountryside Policy Area

Apart from any new allocations (see Issue CRC 2) the countryside in the CountrysidePolicy Area is in many ways as worthy of pro-tection as that which forms the Green Belt andthe current UDP contains a number of policiesto control development in line with nationalplanning guidance. These policies seek to pro-vide for sustainable development which meetsthe economic and social needs of people wholive and work in rural areas whilst maintainingand enhancing the character of the country-side. Getting this balance right is a key issuefor rural areas.

Development in the countryside (i.e. outsidethe development limits of all settlements andany new allocations) would under existing UDPpolicies continue to be limited to modest extensions to existing employment sites, verylimited infill housing development, conversionsof existing buildings to appropriate uses, otherfarm diversification activity which is compatiblewith policies to protect and enhance the countryside, and development which istraditionally appropriate in the countryside

such as that relating to agriculture, forestry,nature conservation and outdoor recreation etc.(It should be noted that national planning policyguidance allows very little flexibility in policiesfor controlling development within the greenbelt)

Do you agree that in the CountrysidePolicy Area (i.e. outside the developmentlimits and any new allocations) new development should generally be confinedto that allowed by current UDP policieswhich seek to allow some rural diversification whilst maintaining andenhancing the character of the countrysideand its villages?

ISSUE CRC 4 – Conversion of RuralBuildings

National and current UDP policies promote theconversion of suitable agricultural and otherbuildings in the countryside to other appropriate uses in the interests of encouraging diversification of the rural economy. A significant and wide variety ofopportunities are thus provided for newemployment, leisure, tourism and communityuses in areas where new building is generallyrestricted whilst attractive buildings, whichmight otherwise fall into disrepair, are given anew life. Residential conversions are discouraged because they a) contribute little torural diversification, b) remove an opportunityfor a more appropriate alternative use, and c)tend to have a more intrusive impact on thesurrounding countryside and on the buildingitself.

Unfortunately the majority of the conversionpressure in Doncaster is for residential use withapplicants sometimes being able to demonstrate that there has been no demandfor alternative uses over a significant period oftime. The issue then is whether UDP Policyshould be tightened up to make it clear thatresidential conversions will be wholly exceptional so that Doncaster’s finite stock ofcountryside buildings are safeguarded for useswhich genuinely contribute to rural diversification or which meet local needs.

Do you think that UDP Policy in respect ofthe conversion of agricultural and othercountryside buildings should be tightened-up so as to allow fewer residential conversions and promote more conversions for employment, leisure,tourism and community uses?

8. Countryside and Rural Communities

4948

National and regional planning guidanceemphasise the urban renaissance agenda, thebrownfield housing target and the searchsequence for new housing sites; the regionalspatial strategy states that "wherever possibledevelopment should be located in urban areas".It is clear that the scale of new rural develop-ment in Doncaster is likely to very limited.

On the other hand RPG states that market andcoalfield towns are, and should continue to be,the main focus for developing local servicesand employment in the rural/coalfield areasand that some modest and sensitive expansionmay be justified where it would support regeneration and/or service provision (includingpublic transport) and infrastructure (includingincreasingly important information and communications technology (ICT) infrastructure). This may also be true of suchsettlements in the Green Belt but there wouldalso need to be exceptional circumstances tojustify such development-see Issue CRC1.

RPG further states that in rural areas the provision of housing should be to meet localneeds and/or support local services giving priority to brownfield opportunities and to theconservation and enhancement of the character of the settlement. Apart from coalfieldand market towns some villages also provideschools and other services to nearby villages.

Residential expansion of smaller villages whichlack services tends to do little to support existing, or generate new, services but doestend to lead to more commuting and longerjourneys for services and can have a dispro-portionately adverse impact on the character ofa village. Most villages are nevertheless popular places to live and attract pressure forresidential development. This can raise localaffordable housing needs issues (see HousingIssues Section).

Do you think that new development inDoncaster’s rural areas should be:

(a) Confined to infilling within the existing development limits of rural towns and villages? or

(b) As in a) but also with some modest expansion of market and coalfield towns where it would support regeneration and/or local housing needs and services? or

(c) As in a) and b) but also with some small scale residential expansion of service villages to meet local needs including affordable housing needs and to support services?

ISSUE CRC 3 – Development Within theCountryside Policy Area

Apart from any new allocations (see Issue CRC 2) the countryside in the CountrysidePolicy Area is in many ways as worthy of pro-tection as that which forms the Green Belt andthe current UDP contains a number of policiesto control development in line with nationalplanning guidance. These policies seek to pro-vide for sustainable development which meetsthe economic and social needs of people wholive and work in rural areas whilst maintainingand enhancing the character of the country-side. Getting this balance right is a key issuefor rural areas.

Development in the countryside (i.e. outsidethe development limits of all settlements andany new allocations) would under existing UDPpolicies continue to be limited to modest extensions to existing employment sites, verylimited infill housing development, conversionsof existing buildings to appropriate uses, otherfarm diversification activity which is compatiblewith policies to protect and enhance the countryside, and development which istraditionally appropriate in the countryside

such as that relating to agriculture, forestry,nature conservation and outdoor recreation etc.(It should be noted that national planning policyguidance allows very little flexibility in policiesfor controlling development within the greenbelt)

Do you agree that in the CountrysidePolicy Area (i.e. outside the developmentlimits and any new allocations) new development should generally be confinedto that allowed by current UDP policieswhich seek to allow some rural diversification whilst maintaining andenhancing the character of the countrysideand its villages?

ISSUE CRC 4 – Conversion of RuralBuildings

National and current UDP policies promote theconversion of suitable agricultural and otherbuildings in the countryside to other appropriate uses in the interests of encouraging diversification of the rural economy. A significant and wide variety ofopportunities are thus provided for newemployment, leisure, tourism and communityuses in areas where new building is generallyrestricted whilst attractive buildings, whichmight otherwise fall into disrepair, are given anew life. Residential conversions are discouraged because they a) contribute little torural diversification, b) remove an opportunityfor a more appropriate alternative use, and c)tend to have a more intrusive impact on thesurrounding countryside and on the buildingitself.

Unfortunately the majority of the conversionpressure in Doncaster is for residential use withapplicants sometimes being able to demonstrate that there has been no demandfor alternative uses over a significant period oftime. The issue then is whether UDP Policyshould be tightened up to make it clear thatresidential conversions will be wholly exceptional so that Doncaster’s finite stock ofcountryside buildings are safeguarded for useswhich genuinely contribute to rural diversification or which meet local needs.

Do you think that UDP Policy in respect ofthe conversion of agricultural and othercountryside buildings should be tightened-up so as to allow fewer residential conversions and promote more conversions for employment, leisure,tourism and community uses?

8. Countryside and Rural Communitites

5150

ISSUE CRC 5 – Agricultural Land Quality

Current national and UDP policies seek to pro-tect the "best and most versatile" (BMV) agricul-tural land from development or change of usethat would result in its irreversible loss. BMVland is a finite national resource and its protec-tion has been widely regarded as compatiblewith the principles of sustainability. TheGovernment has recently suggested that theweight given to this BMV land in planning poli-cies and decisions should be reduced andreplaced with a more holistic approach whichconsiders the overall value of the land includingits landscape quality and its contribution towildlife, recreation, historic and cultural her-itage. This wider value is already reflected inmany current UDP policies but the issue iswhether the overriding protection given to BMVland should be removed.

Do you think that the UDP should continueto have a policy protecting Doncaster’sbest and most versatile agricultural land?

ISSUE CRC 6 – Key Rural Community Facilities

Rural areas generally have suffered from theloss of local services with closures of manyrural post offices, village shops, banks,garages, pubs and schools. Doncaster’s settle-ment pattern means that services are rarelyunduly remote from most rural areas but thedecline in rural services can cause hardship tothose without access to a car and lead tolonger journeys for services and reduce theeconomic and social diversity of rural areas.The closure of a rural service can be precipitat-ed by, and certainly usually leads to, the oppor-tunity for residential conversion or residentialredevelopment. In some cases the provision ofa replacement rural service will not be viable

but in other cases the Local Planning Authoritymay be able to encourage the retention of localservices or the provision of replacement onesby making it clear that residentialconversion/redevelopment will be resisted.

Do you think that a new UDP policy shouldbe introduced to restrict residential redevelopment/conversion of key ruralfacilities?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP policies affectingCountryside and Rural Communities. Theseinclude:

● Conserving and enhancing the Borough’slandscape including local variations in that landscape and protecting wherever possible natural and semi natural landscape features and habitats and built heritage features.

● Affording special protection to the Borough’s Areas Of Special Landscape Value and Parks and Gardens Of Special or Local Historic Interest

● Requiring new development which adjoins the Green Belt or Countryside Policy Area to have a higher standard of landscaping.

● Conserving existing trees, hedgerows andwoodlands and securing significant new woodland planting through Council planting programmes, derelict land restoration, planning obligations on new developments including minerals and waste sites, and encouraging initiatives byprivate landowners, community groups and others.

● Protecting, enhancing, increasing and promoting the wildlife resources of the Borough including defining and protectingsites of international, national and regional/local importance for nature conservation, conserving other natural and semi-natural habitats, requiring mitigation and compensation where appropriate, and securing new wildlife habitats as part of new developments, restoration of minerals and waste sites and the reclamation of derelict land.

● Targeting redundant colliery sites and other significant areas of dereliction for priority restoration to secure major new woodland and informal countryside recreation space, community facilities andappropriate built development.

● Requiring new development in the countryside to be of a high qualitygenerally, particularly in Areas of Special

Landscape Value and along major transportation corridors such as the M18, and to reinforce local landscape distinctiveness through use of materials, architectural design and use of indigenous species.

● Promoting opportunities associated with tourist attractions in the Borough including Brodsworth Hall, Conisbrough Castle, The Earth Centre, the canal network and Thorne Moors

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies tohelp promote and secure:

● Improved rural public and community transport facilities and services

● More rural services and infrastructure including ICT infrastructure which will helpaddress some rural isolation issues (working and shopping from home for example)

● Protection for air and water quality; river management catchment plans

● A strong rural dimension to initiatives to improve training, lifelong learning, awareness of health, crime and safety issues etc.

● Help for rural communities to help themselves to secure improved economic environmental and social conditions and to develop their own priorities and strategies

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD8 Countryside and Rural Communities – Impact of other policies and strategies.

8. Countryside and Rural Communities

8. Countryside and Rural Communitites

5150

ISSUE CRC 5 – Agricultural Land Quality

Current national and UDP policies seek to pro-tect the "best and most versatile" (BMV) agricul-tural land from development or change of usethat would result in its irreversible loss. BMVland is a finite national resource and its protec-tion has been widely regarded as compatiblewith the principles of sustainability. TheGovernment has recently suggested that theweight given to this BMV land in planning poli-cies and decisions should be reduced andreplaced with a more holistic approach whichconsiders the overall value of the land includingits landscape quality and its contribution towildlife, recreation, historic and cultural her-itage. This wider value is already reflected inmany current UDP policies but the issue iswhether the overriding protection given to BMVland should be removed.

Do you think that the UDP should continueto have a policy protecting Doncaster’sbest and most versatile agricultural land?

ISSUE CRC 6 – Key Rural Community Facilities

Rural areas generally have suffered from theloss of local services with closures of manyrural post offices, village shops, banks,garages, pubs and schools. Doncaster’s settle-ment pattern means that services are rarelyunduly remote from most rural areas but thedecline in rural services can cause hardship tothose without access to a car and lead tolonger journeys for services and reduce theeconomic and social diversity of rural areas.The closure of a rural service can be precipitat-ed by, and certainly usually leads to, the oppor-tunity for residential conversion or residentialredevelopment. In some cases the provision ofa replacement rural service will not be viable

but in other cases the Local Planning Authoritymay be able to encourage the retention of localservices or the provision of replacement onesby making it clear that residentialconversion/redevelopment will be resisted.

Do you think that a new UDP policy shouldbe introduced to restrict residential redevelopment/conversion of key ruralfacilities?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP policies affectingCountryside and Rural Communities. Theseinclude:

● Conserving and enhancing the Borough’slandscape including local variations in that landscape and protecting wherever possible natural and semi natural landscape features and habitats and built heritage features.

● Affording special protection to the Borough’s Areas Of Special Landscape Value and Parks and Gardens Of Special or Local Historic Interest

● Requiring new development which adjoins the Green Belt or Countryside Policy Area to have a higher standard of landscaping.

● Conserving existing trees, hedgerows andwoodlands and securing significant new woodland planting through Council planting programmes, derelict land restoration, planning obligations on new developments including minerals and waste sites, and encouraging initiatives byprivate landowners, community groups and others.

● Protecting, enhancing, increasing and promoting the wildlife resources of the Borough including defining and protectingsites of international, national and regional/local importance for nature conservation, conserving other natural and semi-natural habitats, requiring mitigation and compensation where appropriate, and securing new wildlife habitats as part of new developments, restoration of minerals and waste sites and the reclamation of derelict land.

● Targeting redundant colliery sites and other significant areas of dereliction for priority restoration to secure major new woodland and informal countryside recreation space, community facilities andappropriate built development.

● Requiring new development in the countryside to be of a high qualitygenerally, particularly in Areas of Special

Landscape Value and along major transportation corridors such as the M18, and to reinforce local landscape distinctiveness through use of materials, architectural design and use of indigenous species.

● Promoting opportunities associated with tourist attractions in the Borough including Brodsworth Hall, Conisbrough Castle, The Earth Centre, the canal network and Thorne Moors

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies tohelp promote and secure:

● Improved rural public and community transport facilities and services

● More rural services and infrastructure including ICT infrastructure which will helpaddress some rural isolation issues (working and shopping from home for example)

● Protection for air and water quality; river management catchment plans

● A strong rural dimension to initiatives to improve training, lifelong learning, awareness of health, crime and safety issues etc.

● Help for rural communities to help themselves to secure improved economic environmental and social conditions and to develop their own priorities and strategies

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD8 Countryside and Rural Communities – Impact of other policies and strategies.

8. Countryside and Rural Communities

9. Recreation and Greenspace9. Recreation and Greenspace

5352

INTRODUCTION

The current UDP contains policies to protectexisting Greenspace and to provide newGreenspace as part of new developments. It has site-specific proposals for newGreenspace and other recreation facilities tomeet identified deficiencies. The current UDPwas however produced without the benefit of aformal Recreation or Greenspace Strategy.

The Council has recently completed a compre-hensive Borough-wide Greenspace Audit interms of quantity, quality, accessibility and con-dition. Each Greenspace site has been system-atically mapped and analysed against nationaland local standards. Allotments, amenity, for-mal open space, informal open space, publicparks, nature conservation areas and wood-lands have all been individually assessed. Asubstantial public consultation exercise over asix-month period was undertaken to assessneeds, demand and opinion of Doncaster’sGreenspace.

Analysis of the Greenspace Audit has estab-lished that generally throughout the Boroughthere is an undersupply when assessed againstnational standards although this is localisedwith marked variations in different wards andsettlements. There is a lack of qualityGreenspace and quality facilities throughoutthe Borough and significant problems inrespect of safety, security, accessibility andvandalism.

The results of this audit and analysis form thebasis of the Council’s Draft GreenspaceStrategy which sets out how the Councilintends to protect, enhance, improve, manageand market the Borough’s Greenspace.

The UDP will need to set out the land use poli-cies necessary to support and implement cer-tain land use aspects of the Greenspace strate-gy. In particular the UDP Review needs to rollforward current UDP policies (amended asnecessary), which seek to protect Greenspaceand deliver new or improved Greenspace andassociated facilities as part of new develop-ments.

The Council has also recently prepared a draftActive Sport And Recreation Strategy that willbe the framework for future provision of indoorand outdoor active sports and recreation. Itidentifies the role for DMBC as provider,enabler and advocate in partnership and therole of other public, voluntary and commercialsectors. It looks at individual sports, facilities,coaching, education, development work andlocal partnerships. Again the UDP will supportthis strategy by providing the land use contextand the necessary policies and proposals tosupport the protection of existing facilities andthe provision of new and improved facilities.

Both these Strategies are likely to evolve in par-allel with the UDP Review process.

New National Planning Policy Guidance "Sport,Open Space And Recreation- Planning PolicyGuidance (PPG) Note 17" was issued in July2002. In keeping with the Government’s overallobjectives it promotes more sustainable pat-terns of development, social inclusion, healthand well being, rural renewal, and an urbanrenaissance. It requires UDPs to protect exist-ing facilities and make provision for new facili-ties based on a robust assessment of needand requires more intensive leisure facilities tobe located in or adjacent to Town Centres orDistrict Centres

KEY FACTS

● A recent Greenspace Audit assessed Doncaster’s greenspaces in terms of quantity, quality, accessibility and condition, local needs, demand and opinion. Doncaster has 21 parks covering200 hectares (attracting an average 21 million visits a year) and approximately 1000 other green spaces including amenity areas, allotments and play areas.

● Generally there is an undersupply of greenspace when assessed against national standards with marked variations in different parts of the Borough and a lack of quality facilities

● The Council has also recently prepared a draft Active Sport and Recreation Strategythat will be the framework for future provision of indoor and outdoor active sports and recreation.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Promotes sport and leisure as an essential element in more sustainable patterns of development, social inclusion, health and well being, rural renewal, and an urban renaissance.

● Requires UDPs to protect existing facilities and make provision for new facilities based on a robust assessment ofneed

● Requires more intensive leisure facilities to be located in or adjacent to Town Centres or District Centres

THE CURRENT UDP

● Contains policies to protect existing Greenspace and to provide new Greenspace as part of new developments

● Contains site-specific proposals for new Greenspace and other recreation facilitiesto meet identified deficiencies.

● Was prepared without the benefit of aformal Recreation or Greenspace Strategyand contains no sequential policy

ISSUE RG 1 – Greenspace Protection

Current UDP policy provides very strongprotection for Greenspace; development ofthese areas for other purposes is only allowedin exceptional circumstances (and then only ifalternative provision is made) or where redevelopment of a small part of a site is thebest way of retaining and enhancing sport andrecreation facilities. The UDP Review will rollforward the same or very similar protection policies. However it is necessary for protectionand future provision to be based on a robustassessment of need (the Greenspace Audit)and on the principles of establishing equalityand quality of provision across the Borough(The Greenspace Strategy).

Because the Audit identified variations in provision across the Borough and the need toimprove quality generally it is likely that theStrategy will identify a few urban Greenspacesites as surplus to requirements because theyexceed national or local standards of provision.These sites could be retained in an open condition with low maintenance for nature conservation or amenity purposes.

9. Recreation and Greenspace9. Recreation and Greenspace

5352

INTRODUCTION

The current UDP contains policies to protectexisting Greenspace and to provide newGreenspace as part of new developments. It has site-specific proposals for newGreenspace and other recreation facilities tomeet identified deficiencies. The current UDPwas however produced without the benefit of aformal Recreation or Greenspace Strategy.

The Council has recently completed a compre-hensive Borough-wide Greenspace Audit interms of quantity, quality, accessibility and con-dition. Each Greenspace site has been system-atically mapped and analysed against nationaland local standards. Allotments, amenity, for-mal open space, informal open space, publicparks, nature conservation areas and wood-lands have all been individually assessed. Asubstantial public consultation exercise over asix-month period was undertaken to assessneeds, demand and opinion of Doncaster’sGreenspace.

Analysis of the Greenspace Audit has estab-lished that generally throughout the Boroughthere is an undersupply when assessed againstnational standards although this is localisedwith marked variations in different wards andsettlements. There is a lack of qualityGreenspace and quality facilities throughoutthe Borough and significant problems inrespect of safety, security, accessibility andvandalism.

The results of this audit and analysis form thebasis of the Council’s Draft GreenspaceStrategy which sets out how the Councilintends to protect, enhance, improve, manageand market the Borough’s Greenspace.

The UDP will need to set out the land use poli-cies necessary to support and implement cer-tain land use aspects of the Greenspace strate-gy. In particular the UDP Review needs to rollforward current UDP policies (amended asnecessary), which seek to protect Greenspaceand deliver new or improved Greenspace andassociated facilities as part of new develop-ments.

The Council has also recently prepared a draftActive Sport And Recreation Strategy that willbe the framework for future provision of indoorand outdoor active sports and recreation. Itidentifies the role for DMBC as provider,enabler and advocate in partnership and therole of other public, voluntary and commercialsectors. It looks at individual sports, facilities,coaching, education, development work andlocal partnerships. Again the UDP will supportthis strategy by providing the land use contextand the necessary policies and proposals tosupport the protection of existing facilities andthe provision of new and improved facilities.

Both these Strategies are likely to evolve in par-allel with the UDP Review process.

New National Planning Policy Guidance "Sport,Open Space And Recreation- Planning PolicyGuidance (PPG) Note 17" was issued in July2002. In keeping with the Government’s overallobjectives it promotes more sustainable pat-terns of development, social inclusion, healthand well being, rural renewal, and an urbanrenaissance. It requires UDPs to protect exist-ing facilities and make provision for new facili-ties based on a robust assessment of needand requires more intensive leisure facilities tobe located in or adjacent to Town Centres orDistrict Centres

KEY FACTS

● A recent Greenspace Audit assessed Doncaster’s greenspaces in terms of quantity, quality, accessibility and condition, local needs, demand and opinion. Doncaster has 21 parks covering200 hectares (attracting an average 21 million visits a year) and approximately 1000 other green spaces including amenity areas, allotments and play areas.

● Generally there is an undersupply of greenspace when assessed against national standards with marked variations in different parts of the Borough and a lack of quality facilities

● The Council has also recently prepared a draft Active Sport and Recreation Strategythat will be the framework for future provision of indoor and outdoor active sports and recreation.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Promotes sport and leisure as an essential element in more sustainable patterns of development, social inclusion, health and well being, rural renewal, and an urban renaissance.

● Requires UDPs to protect existing facilities and make provision for new facilities based on a robust assessment ofneed

● Requires more intensive leisure facilities to be located in or adjacent to Town Centres or District Centres

THE CURRENT UDP

● Contains policies to protect existing Greenspace and to provide new Greenspace as part of new developments

● Contains site-specific proposals for new Greenspace and other recreation facilitiesto meet identified deficiencies.

● Was prepared without the benefit of aformal Recreation or Greenspace Strategyand contains no sequential policy

ISSUE RG 1 – Greenspace Protection

Current UDP policy provides very strongprotection for Greenspace; development ofthese areas for other purposes is only allowedin exceptional circumstances (and then only ifalternative provision is made) or where redevelopment of a small part of a site is thebest way of retaining and enhancing sport andrecreation facilities. The UDP Review will rollforward the same or very similar protection policies. However it is necessary for protectionand future provision to be based on a robustassessment of need (the Greenspace Audit)and on the principles of establishing equalityand quality of provision across the Borough(The Greenspace Strategy).

Because the Audit identified variations in provision across the Borough and the need toimprove quality generally it is likely that theStrategy will identify a few urban Greenspacesites as surplus to requirements because theyexceed national or local standards of provision.These sites could be retained in an open condition with low maintenance for nature conservation or amenity purposes.

9. Recreation and Greenspace

5554

Alternatively they could be redeveloped forhousing or other development so as to helpminimise the loss of countryside to new devel-opment and so as to generate funds to provideor enhance Greenspace elsewhere to meet anidentified deficiency. The scale of such surplus-es is not anticipated to be large and any sitesidentified as suitable for redevelopment will besubject to public consultation through theDeposit Draft UDP or as appropriate.

Do you think that in general terms development should be allowed on surplusurban Greenspace provided this wouldhelp in a) minimising loss of countrysideand b) funding Greenspace improvementselsewhere?

ISSUE RG 2 – Greenspace and RecreationRequirements in New Developments

Current UDP policy requires new housingdevelopments of ten or more houses to makesome provision for Greenspace and recreationfacilities principally (although not exclusively)for the benefit of the development itself. On thelarger housing and mixed-use developmentsthis is usually in the form of on-site provision.However where the development is not largeenough to generate a usefully sizedGreenspace it is often more beneficial torequire money in lieu of Greenspace

(a commuted sum) which can then be spent onenhancing existing Greenspace/facilities in thevicinity. Occasionally commuted sums can becombined to develop new Greenspace. Oftencommuted sums can be used as match fund-ing to attract additional grant funding.

Whilst this approach can result in the smallerhousing sites being developed without theirown integral Greenspace it does means thatmore resources are available overall forGreenspace and recreation facilities and thatthese resources can be used more flexibly inaccordance with a strategy and programme ofprovision and improvements.

Significant additional resources for Greenspaceand recreation facilities could be generated ifall new housing developments were required tomake a contribution rather than just those overten units; the figure of "ten" was adopted in thecurrent UDP simply for practical purposes asall commuted sums require a planning obliga-tion attached to the planning permission andthis can delay the determination of planningpermissions although it need not do. All hous-ing developments generate demand forGreenspace and contribute to the pressure onexisting Greenspace and there is therefore astrong case for subjecting all housing applica-tions to such a policy.

Do you think that all new housing develop-ments should contribute to the provision orimprovement of Greenspace and recre-ation facilities?

ISSUE RG 3 – Commercial Indoor LeisureFacilities and Town Centres

National and regional planning policies pro-mote the vitality and viability of town centresand more sustainable development patterns;as part of this, proposals for key town centreuses require a sequential test approach. Keytown centre uses include indoor leisure facili-ties such as fitness clubs, cinemas, theatres,bingo, snooker, casinos etc. (but not sportingfacilities). In other words proposals for suchuses should be directed to Doncaster,Mexborough and Thorne town centre siteswherever possible; where appropriate towncentre sites don’t exist then edge-of-town centre sites followed by district centre sites arethe preferred locations. Only if none of theseopportunities are available should out-of-centrelocations be considered.

Fitness centres are becoming increasingly pop-ular and numerous and there is a sustainabilityargument for small-scale facilities designed toserve local areas being directed to district cen-tres (or exceptionally to large employment siteswhere they would primarily serve the needs ofthe local workforce) so that they provide for amore even distribution of facilities in a similarway to traditional sports centres and swimmingpools.

Doncaster Lakeside is an out of centre locationbut with its concentration of leisure uses andgood bus services it has sustainability benefitscompared to other out of centre locations andarguably to some district centres. It is alsorecognised that opportunities in some district

centres are limited. However it is important thatkey town centre uses are located in the towncentres so that The Lakeside and DoncasterTown Centre in particular can develop as com-plementary rather than competing attractions.

The UDP will need to include a policy embody-ing the sequential approach. This could list thetypes of indoor leisure uses which are to betreated as key town centre uses or set outmore general criteria. Small-scale fitness cen-tres and other facilities designed to serve localareas could be directed in the first instance todistrict centres rather than town centres. TheLakeside could be identified as the mostfavourable out of centre location for certaintypes of leisure uses.

Which types of leisure uses do you thinkshould be located in a) Doncaster,Mexborough and Thorne Town Centres; b)district centres; c) Doncaster Lakeside?

ISSUE RG4 – Active Sport and Recreation:Facilities Development

Key land use findings from the Draft ActiveSport and Recreation Strategy include:

● Some DMBC facilities are not located in the most appropriate locations due to historical reasons

● A majority of facilities are over 25 years old and have suffered from a lack of investment over a significant period of time

● The Dome has received significant capitalinvestment compared to the Council’s outlying community facilities

● The opportunities for pitch development identified through the Greenspace Strategy need to be clearly linked to proposals for indoor facilities to ensure optimum use of facilities, land and funding

9. Recreation and Greenspace

5554

Alternatively they could be redeveloped forhousing or other development so as to helpminimise the loss of countryside to new devel-opment and so as to generate funds to provideor enhance Greenspace elsewhere to meet anidentified deficiency. The scale of such surplus-es is not anticipated to be large and any sitesidentified as suitable for redevelopment will besubject to public consultation through theDeposit Draft UDP or as appropriate.

Do you think that in general terms development should be allowed on surplusurban Greenspace provided this wouldhelp in a) minimising loss of countrysideand b) funding Greenspace improvementselsewhere?

ISSUE RG 2 – Greenspace and RecreationRequirements in New Developments

Current UDP policy requires new housingdevelopments of ten or more houses to makesome provision for Greenspace and recreationfacilities principally (although not exclusively)for the benefit of the development itself. On thelarger housing and mixed-use developmentsthis is usually in the form of on-site provision.However where the development is not largeenough to generate a usefully sizedGreenspace it is often more beneficial torequire money in lieu of Greenspace

(a commuted sum) which can then be spent onenhancing existing Greenspace/facilities in thevicinity. Occasionally commuted sums can becombined to develop new Greenspace. Oftencommuted sums can be used as match fund-ing to attract additional grant funding.

Whilst this approach can result in the smallerhousing sites being developed without theirown integral Greenspace it does means thatmore resources are available overall forGreenspace and recreation facilities and thatthese resources can be used more flexibly inaccordance with a strategy and programme ofprovision and improvements.

Significant additional resources for Greenspaceand recreation facilities could be generated ifall new housing developments were required tomake a contribution rather than just those overten units; the figure of "ten" was adopted in thecurrent UDP simply for practical purposes asall commuted sums require a planning obliga-tion attached to the planning permission andthis can delay the determination of planningpermissions although it need not do. All hous-ing developments generate demand forGreenspace and contribute to the pressure onexisting Greenspace and there is therefore astrong case for subjecting all housing applica-tions to such a policy.

Do you think that all new housing develop-ments should contribute to the provision orimprovement of Greenspace and recre-ation facilities?

ISSUE RG 3 – Commercial Indoor LeisureFacilities and Town Centres

National and regional planning policies pro-mote the vitality and viability of town centresand more sustainable development patterns;as part of this, proposals for key town centreuses require a sequential test approach. Keytown centre uses include indoor leisure facili-ties such as fitness clubs, cinemas, theatres,bingo, snooker, casinos etc. (but not sportingfacilities). In other words proposals for suchuses should be directed to Doncaster,Mexborough and Thorne town centre siteswherever possible; where appropriate towncentre sites don’t exist then edge-of-town centre sites followed by district centre sites arethe preferred locations. Only if none of theseopportunities are available should out-of-centrelocations be considered.

Fitness centres are becoming increasingly pop-ular and numerous and there is a sustainabilityargument for small-scale facilities designed toserve local areas being directed to district cen-tres (or exceptionally to large employment siteswhere they would primarily serve the needs ofthe local workforce) so that they provide for amore even distribution of facilities in a similarway to traditional sports centres and swimmingpools.

Doncaster Lakeside is an out of centre locationbut with its concentration of leisure uses andgood bus services it has sustainability benefitscompared to other out of centre locations andarguably to some district centres. It is alsorecognised that opportunities in some district

centres are limited. However it is important thatkey town centre uses are located in the towncentres so that The Lakeside and DoncasterTown Centre in particular can develop as com-plementary rather than competing attractions.

The UDP will need to include a policy embody-ing the sequential approach. This could list thetypes of indoor leisure uses which are to betreated as key town centre uses or set outmore general criteria. Small-scale fitness cen-tres and other facilities designed to serve localareas could be directed in the first instance todistrict centres rather than town centres. TheLakeside could be identified as the mostfavourable out of centre location for certaintypes of leisure uses.

Which types of leisure uses do you thinkshould be located in a) Doncaster,Mexborough and Thorne Town Centres; b)district centres; c) Doncaster Lakeside?

ISSUE RG4 – Active Sport and Recreation:Facilities Development

Key land use findings from the Draft ActiveSport and Recreation Strategy include:

● Some DMBC facilities are not located in the most appropriate locations due to historical reasons

● A majority of facilities are over 25 years old and have suffered from a lack of investment over a significant period of time

● The Dome has received significant capitalinvestment compared to the Council’s outlying community facilities

● The opportunities for pitch development identified through the Greenspace Strategy need to be clearly linked to proposals for indoor facilities to ensure optimum use of facilities, land and funding

9. Recreation and Greenspace9. Recreation and Greenspace

5756

● Often, facilities are not easily accessed bypublic transport; new sport and recreationprovision must be accessible to all sectors of the population

● Some schools do not have adequate facilities (e.g. some secondary schools have no sports hall). Opportunities exist todevelop new and improved facilities at schools which could benefit the wider community.

● Miner’s welfare grounds have great potential for facility improvements and wider community benefits.

In response to these findings the initial conclusions of the Strategy are that:

● A cohesive strategic framework for future delivery of sport and active recreation is required and that this is likely to result in fewer, higher quality facilities in the right places for the right people i.e. reflecting community needs and aspirations

● DMBC facilities will be rationalised in parallel with development of appropriate facilities on secondary schools and Miners Welfare Grounds.

● Sports specific facility development e.g. athletics, multi-use games areas, basketball and skateparks should be supported where they fit within the overall strategic context of Borough provision (although direct provision by DMBC will only be where this cannot be facilitated through external partnership).

● Future provision for pitch based sports and informal recreation should be in line with the Greenspace Strategy but where possible and appropriate facilities for indoor and outdoor sport and active recreation should be provided on the same site.

Do you agree with the key land-use find-ings and initial conclusions of the ActiveSport And Recreation Strategy?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the policies contained in the currentUDP including:

● Requiring non-residential developments to contribute to the provision or enhancement of Greenspace or recreational facilities where appropriate.

● Ensuring that development adjoining Greenspace respects and where possibleenhances its amenity value.

● Retaining surplus school playing fields forpublic Greenspace purposes.

● Protecting those countryside features which offer the best opportunities for informal countryside recreation such as woodlands, canals, disused railway lines, and other important natural and man made elements of the landscape.

● Supporting the increased use of navigable waterways for leisure use

● Promoting the use and enhancement of pedestrian and cyclist facilities

● Continuing to explore the feasibility of establishing a new country park in the vicinity of Rossington Hall

● Continuing to support the development ofthe Glass Park at Kirk Sandall

● Continuing to support the establishment of community woodlands and country parks on redundant colliery sites

● Promoting opportunities associated with tourist attractions in the Borough including Brodsworth Hall, Conisbrough Castle, The Earth Centre, the canal network and Thorne Moors

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies, inparticular the Greenspace and the Active SportAnd Recreation Strategies, and alongside otheragencies to help promote and secure:

● Improvements to the quality of Greenspace and recreation facilities

● Increased participation in sport and activerecreation

● Greater equality in the provision and accessibility of services and facilities across the Borough and its communities

● Greater public access to school sports facilities

● Support for community, voluntary and private sector provision of sport and recreation facilities.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD9 Recreation and Greenspace – Impact of other policies and strategies

9. Recreation and Greenspace9. Recreation and Greenspace

5756

● Often, facilities are not easily accessed bypublic transport; new sport and recreationprovision must be accessible to all sectors of the population

● Some schools do not have adequate facilities (e.g. some secondary schools have no sports hall). Opportunities exist todevelop new and improved facilities at schools which could benefit the wider community.

● Miner’s welfare grounds have great potential for facility improvements and wider community benefits.

In response to these findings the initial conclusions of the Strategy are that:

● A cohesive strategic framework for future delivery of sport and active recreation is required and that this is likely to result in fewer, higher quality facilities in the right places for the right people i.e. reflecting community needs and aspirations

● DMBC facilities will be rationalised in parallel with development of appropriate facilities on secondary schools and Miners Welfare Grounds.

● Sports specific facility development e.g. athletics, multi-use games areas, basketball and skateparks should be supported where they fit within the overall strategic context of Borough provision (although direct provision by DMBC will only be where this cannot be facilitated through external partnership).

● Future provision for pitch based sports and informal recreation should be in line with the Greenspace Strategy but where possible and appropriate facilities for indoor and outdoor sport and active recreation should be provided on the same site.

Do you agree with the key land-use find-ings and initial conclusions of the ActiveSport And Recreation Strategy?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the policies contained in the currentUDP including:

● Requiring non-residential developments to contribute to the provision or enhancement of Greenspace or recreational facilities where appropriate.

● Ensuring that development adjoining Greenspace respects and where possibleenhances its amenity value.

● Retaining surplus school playing fields forpublic Greenspace purposes.

● Protecting those countryside features which offer the best opportunities for informal countryside recreation such as woodlands, canals, disused railway lines, and other important natural and man made elements of the landscape.

● Supporting the increased use of navigable waterways for leisure use

● Promoting the use and enhancement of pedestrian and cyclist facilities

● Continuing to explore the feasibility of establishing a new country park in the vicinity of Rossington Hall

● Continuing to support the development ofthe Glass Park at Kirk Sandall

● Continuing to support the establishment of community woodlands and country parks on redundant colliery sites

● Promoting opportunities associated with tourist attractions in the Borough including Brodsworth Hall, Conisbrough Castle, The Earth Centre, the canal network and Thorne Moors

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies, inparticular the Greenspace and the Active SportAnd Recreation Strategies, and alongside otheragencies to help promote and secure:

● Improvements to the quality of Greenspace and recreation facilities

● Increased participation in sport and activerecreation

● Greater equality in the provision and accessibility of services and facilities across the Borough and its communities

● Greater public access to school sports facilities

● Support for community, voluntary and private sector provision of sport and recreation facilities.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD9 Recreation and Greenspace – Impact of other policies and strategies

10. Transport10. Transport

5958

INTRODUCTION

Transport is a vital component of our lives,enabling much of our social and economicactivity. The means of transport we have avail-able to us today provide us with a great deal offreedom and broaden the opportunities wehave both in our private and working lives.There are however costs associated with mostforms of transport, car usage in particular hasseen massive growth in the last few decades tothe extent that it is damaging our towns andcountryside and significantly contributing topollution levels and global warming.

Doncaster has historically had strong connec-tions with transport, it sits on th old Great NorthRoad and grew as one of the Country’s mainrailway centres. Doncaster today sits in animportant strategic position in the transport net-work, it is in close proximity to the M18, M1 andA1 (M) and with the M62 to the North. TheTown also has strong links to the Humber Portsand has a major station on the East Cost MainLine. The importance of Doncaster in thestrategic transport network is reflected byrecent developments, such as Doncaster RailPort and a variety of distribution centres andalso in proposed developments including thedevelopment of the former RAF Finningley siteas an international airport and DoncasterInterchange.

Doncaster has a wide variety of transportneeds, having a mixture of urban areas, satel-lite towns and villages and smaller villages,some of which are quite remote. Doncaster is aphysically large Borough and with its mix ofurban and rural settlements presents a diverserange of challenges and opportunities for trans-port provision.

The current UDP has three principle objectives,economic regeneration, environmentalimprovement and reduction in social inequali-ties. In relation to transport, this is to beachieved by:

● Facilitating the improvement of the strategic highways and public transport networks within the Borough and links tothe regional and national networks and providing strategic transport interchangefacilities.

● Ensuring that transportation proposals contribute to environmental improvements through, for example, highway improvements, traffic management, traffic calming and pedestrianisation.

● Promoting the maintenance and improvement of public transport facilities.

In addition, when land was allocated in the cur-rent UDP for housing and employment sites,regard was given to, among other things,accessibility by road and proximity to the publictransport network.

When reviewing the UDP the Council will haveto have regard to a wide variety of existingguidance and strategies but primarily NationalGovernment and Regional guidance and theSouth Yorkshire Local Transport Plan.

The South Yorkshire Local Transport Plan (LTP)has been prepared within the national policyframework for integrated transport set out in theWhite Paper "A New Deal for Transport: Betterfor Everyone". The overriding objectives ofnational policy are to contribute to sustainabledevelopment by:

● Protecting and enhancing the built and natural environment Improving safety forall travellers,

● Contributing to an efficient economy andsupporting sustainable economic growth,

● In appropriate locations promoting accessibility to everyday facilities for all, especially those without a car,

● Promoting the integration of all forms of transport and land use planning, leadingto a better, more efficient transport system.

Government guidance relating to transport isdetailed in Planning Policy Guidance Note13(PPG13), the core objectives of which are topromote more sustainable transport choices,and reduce the need to travel, especially bycar. Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) pro-vides a planning framework for Yorkshire andthe Humber and incorporates a RegionalTransport Strategy (RTS). The RTS compli-ments the land-use policies and provides aregional context for the Local Transport Plans(LTP). The LTP forms the transport frameworkfor South Yorkshire, and will compliment therevised UDP which will provide the land usepolicy framework necessary to promote moresustainable transport.

Greater emphasis will be given to sustainability,as the main driver for transport policy, in therevised UDP. One of the main aims will be thereducing the number of journeys made by pri-vate car not only through controls but byincreasing the attractiveness of other forms oftravel by building on and developing the inte-gration of Doncaster’s existing public transportinfrastructure.

Many issues relating to transport are dealt withthrough means other than the planning system,which deals with land use issues and providesdetailed policy for development control. It isenvisaged that many of the detailed schemes,of the type outlined in the current UDP, will notbe included in the revision. Such schemes willbe dealt with in the Local Transport Plan. Therevised UDP will however, have a key role in:

● Ensuring that new development is located, designed and managed so thatthe number of additional vehicle journeys it is likely to generate are minimised;

● Ensuring that new development can provide a real choice of transport, includingwalking cycling and public transport as well as the car, and that new development contributes to meeting the demand for transport provision that it generates;

● Promoting transport integration and consolidate Doncaster’s role as a regional transport hub;

● Protect existing transport infrastructure and safeguarding land for publictransport infrastructure, cycleway and road improvements.

10. Transport10. Transport

5958

INTRODUCTION

Transport is a vital component of our lives,enabling much of our social and economicactivity. The means of transport we have avail-able to us today provide us with a great deal offreedom and broaden the opportunities wehave both in our private and working lives.There are however costs associated with mostforms of transport, car usage in particular hasseen massive growth in the last few decades tothe extent that it is damaging our towns andcountryside and significantly contributing topollution levels and global warming.

Doncaster has historically had strong connec-tions with transport, it sits on th old Great NorthRoad and grew as one of the Country’s mainrailway centres. Doncaster today sits in animportant strategic position in the transport net-work, it is in close proximity to the M18, M1 andA1 (M) and with the M62 to the North. TheTown also has strong links to the Humber Portsand has a major station on the East Cost MainLine. The importance of Doncaster in thestrategic transport network is reflected byrecent developments, such as Doncaster RailPort and a variety of distribution centres andalso in proposed developments including thedevelopment of the former RAF Finningley siteas an international airport and DoncasterInterchange.

Doncaster has a wide variety of transportneeds, having a mixture of urban areas, satel-lite towns and villages and smaller villages,some of which are quite remote. Doncaster is aphysically large Borough and with its mix ofurban and rural settlements presents a diverserange of challenges and opportunities for trans-port provision.

The current UDP has three principle objectives,economic regeneration, environmentalimprovement and reduction in social inequali-ties. In relation to transport, this is to beachieved by:

● Facilitating the improvement of the strategic highways and public transport networks within the Borough and links tothe regional and national networks and providing strategic transport interchangefacilities.

● Ensuring that transportation proposals contribute to environmental improvements through, for example, highway improvements, traffic management, traffic calming and pedestrianisation.

● Promoting the maintenance and improvement of public transport facilities.

In addition, when land was allocated in the cur-rent UDP for housing and employment sites,regard was given to, among other things,accessibility by road and proximity to the publictransport network.

When reviewing the UDP the Council will haveto have regard to a wide variety of existingguidance and strategies but primarily NationalGovernment and Regional guidance and theSouth Yorkshire Local Transport Plan.

The South Yorkshire Local Transport Plan (LTP)has been prepared within the national policyframework for integrated transport set out in theWhite Paper "A New Deal for Transport: Betterfor Everyone". The overriding objectives ofnational policy are to contribute to sustainabledevelopment by:

● Protecting and enhancing the built and natural environment Improving safety forall travellers,

● Contributing to an efficient economy andsupporting sustainable economic growth,

● In appropriate locations promoting accessibility to everyday facilities for all, especially those without a car,

● Promoting the integration of all forms of transport and land use planning, leadingto a better, more efficient transport system.

Government guidance relating to transport isdetailed in Planning Policy Guidance Note13(PPG13), the core objectives of which are topromote more sustainable transport choices,and reduce the need to travel, especially bycar. Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) pro-vides a planning framework for Yorkshire andthe Humber and incorporates a RegionalTransport Strategy (RTS). The RTS compli-ments the land-use policies and provides aregional context for the Local Transport Plans(LTP). The LTP forms the transport frameworkfor South Yorkshire, and will compliment therevised UDP which will provide the land usepolicy framework necessary to promote moresustainable transport.

Greater emphasis will be given to sustainability,as the main driver for transport policy, in therevised UDP. One of the main aims will be thereducing the number of journeys made by pri-vate car not only through controls but byincreasing the attractiveness of other forms oftravel by building on and developing the inte-gration of Doncaster’s existing public transportinfrastructure.

Many issues relating to transport are dealt withthrough means other than the planning system,which deals with land use issues and providesdetailed policy for development control. It isenvisaged that many of the detailed schemes,of the type outlined in the current UDP, will notbe included in the revision. Such schemes willbe dealt with in the Local Transport Plan. Therevised UDP will however, have a key role in:

● Ensuring that new development is located, designed and managed so thatthe number of additional vehicle journeys it is likely to generate are minimised;

● Ensuring that new development can provide a real choice of transport, includingwalking cycling and public transport as well as the car, and that new development contributes to meeting the demand for transport provision that it generates;

● Promoting transport integration and consolidate Doncaster’s role as a regional transport hub;

● Protect existing transport infrastructure and safeguarding land for publictransport infrastructure, cycleway and road improvements.

10. Transport10. Transport

6160

KEY FACTS

● Major transport proposals include a new international airport at Finningley, a road–rail interchange in Doncaster town centre, and dualling of White Rose Way. M18 link roads to serve Rossington, Hatfield and Finningley Airport are also under consideration.

● There is evidence that the proposed airport will bring economic benefits both to Doncaster and the wider region; by 2014 the airport could be expected to provide around 2000 jobs and create over5000 other jobs.

● There are currently over 4500 off-street car parking spaces in Doncaster Town Centre. Average occupancy throughout the year is 61% rising to 86% over the Christmas period.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Promote more sustainable transport choices, reduce the need to travel, especially by car, and contribute to sustainable economic growth

● In appropriate locations promoteaccessibility to everyday facilities for all, especially those without a car

● Promote integration of all forms of transport and land use planning, leading to a better, more efficient transport system.

THE CURRENT UDP

● Includes proposals for improving the strategic highways and public transport networks within the Borough and links to the regional and national networks

● Includes policies requiring transportation proposals to contribute to environmental improvements e.g. highway improvements, traffic management, trafficcalming and pedestrianisation.

● Promotes maintenance and improvement of public transport facilities

● Allocates land for development on accessible sites and with proximity to the public transport network.

ISSUE T1 - Transport and The Location ofNew Development

All new development has the potential to createthe need for journeys and the location of newdevelopment will influence how long journeysare, what means of transport can be used andhow frequent journeys are. The spatial relationship between different forms of development such as housing, employment,shopping and leisure will influence our transport options, and the decisions we makewhen planning a journey.

Locating different uses close together canincrease opportunities for walking and cycling,it is generally more cost effective to providepublic transport such as buses in more built upareas and, therefore potentially easier to provide a more frequent higher quality service.

Locating new development in or adjacent toexisting built up areas or centres of activityincreases the potential for reducing car useand increasing the use of less environmentallyharmful modes of transport, or remove theneed to travel altogether.

Development sites should also be locatedwhere public transport services already exist orwhere they can be accommodated and wherethere is adequate capacity in the road network.

While mixtures of uses should ideally be con-centrated together other factors may make thisimpractical. In Doncaster the majority of theWestern part of the Borough is covered beGreenbelt, some of the settlements in theWestern half of the Borough are also relativelyinaccessible from the trunk road network.Because of this there may be limited scope forthe development of employment in much of theWestern part of the borough. In addition to this,under the Objective 1 programme a StrategicEconomic Zone has been declared along theM18 and Doncaster town centre. The bestopportunities for development appear to be onthe Eastern side of the Borough, although con-centrating development along the M18 corridormay conflict with urban renaissance principles.

The effect of major development on highwaynetwork needs also to be recognised. RegionalPlanning Guidance (RPG) states that develop-ment likely to cause large amounts of vehiculartraffic should not be located at motorway junc-tions, a position supported by the recently pub-lished South and West Yorkshire Multi ModalStudy Report. If future development is, forexample, to be directed to the M18 corridor, theeffects on traffic levels on the motorways willneed careful consideration, this issue is cur-rently the subject of a memorandum of under-standing with the Highways Agency.

Given the above, it may be appropriate to con-centrate employment and residential develop-ment in the Eastern part of the borough andensure that adequate provision is made toallow easy access from the whole of theBorough to employment sites by public trans-port and road.

Should the majority of new development belocated where there is good access to thestrategic highway network?

ISSUE T2 - New Development andTransport Provision

Government planning guidance (PPG13) statesthat where developments will have significanttransport implications ‘Transport Assessments’should be prepared and submitted alongsidethe relevant planning applications. For majorproposals the assessment should illustrateaccessibility to the site by all modes and thelikely modal split of journeys to and from thesite. Where appropriate a travel plan should beincluded. The UDP will have to consider how tomanage traffic impacts arising from all newdevelopment, including how to provideincreased travel choice and reducing the needto travel, through the implementation of travelplans.

PPG13 also states that the development planshould indicate the likely nature and scope ofcontributions that will be sought towards trans-port improvements as part of development inparticular areas or on key sites. In some casescommuted payments may be appropriate, forexample, towards public transport infrastruc-ture. PPG13 also requires that maximum carparking standards are applied to larger com-mercial developments and recommends thatresidential developments have an averagenumber of parking spaces of no more than 1.5per dwelling.

10. Transport10. Transport

6160

KEY FACTS

● Major transport proposals include a new international airport at Finningley, a road–rail interchange in Doncaster town centre, and dualling of White Rose Way. M18 link roads to serve Rossington, Hatfield and Finningley Airport are also under consideration.

● There is evidence that the proposed airport will bring economic benefits both to Doncaster and the wider region; by 2014 the airport could be expected to provide around 2000 jobs and create over5000 other jobs.

● There are currently over 4500 off-street car parking spaces in Doncaster Town Centre. Average occupancy throughout the year is 61% rising to 86% over the Christmas period.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Promote more sustainable transport choices, reduce the need to travel, especially by car, and contribute to sustainable economic growth

● In appropriate locations promoteaccessibility to everyday facilities for all, especially those without a car

● Promote integration of all forms of transport and land use planning, leading to a better, more efficient transport system.

THE CURRENT UDP

● Includes proposals for improving the strategic highways and public transport networks within the Borough and links to the regional and national networks

● Includes policies requiring transportation proposals to contribute to environmental improvements e.g. highway improvements, traffic management, trafficcalming and pedestrianisation.

● Promotes maintenance and improvement of public transport facilities

● Allocates land for development on accessible sites and with proximity to the public transport network.

ISSUE T1 - Transport and The Location ofNew Development

All new development has the potential to createthe need for journeys and the location of newdevelopment will influence how long journeysare, what means of transport can be used andhow frequent journeys are. The spatial relationship between different forms of development such as housing, employment,shopping and leisure will influence our transport options, and the decisions we makewhen planning a journey.

Locating different uses close together canincrease opportunities for walking and cycling,it is generally more cost effective to providepublic transport such as buses in more built upareas and, therefore potentially easier to provide a more frequent higher quality service.

Locating new development in or adjacent toexisting built up areas or centres of activityincreases the potential for reducing car useand increasing the use of less environmentallyharmful modes of transport, or remove theneed to travel altogether.

Development sites should also be locatedwhere public transport services already exist orwhere they can be accommodated and wherethere is adequate capacity in the road network.

While mixtures of uses should ideally be con-centrated together other factors may make thisimpractical. In Doncaster the majority of theWestern part of the Borough is covered beGreenbelt, some of the settlements in theWestern half of the Borough are also relativelyinaccessible from the trunk road network.Because of this there may be limited scope forthe development of employment in much of theWestern part of the borough. In addition to this,under the Objective 1 programme a StrategicEconomic Zone has been declared along theM18 and Doncaster town centre. The bestopportunities for development appear to be onthe Eastern side of the Borough, although con-centrating development along the M18 corridormay conflict with urban renaissance principles.

The effect of major development on highwaynetwork needs also to be recognised. RegionalPlanning Guidance (RPG) states that develop-ment likely to cause large amounts of vehiculartraffic should not be located at motorway junc-tions, a position supported by the recently pub-lished South and West Yorkshire Multi ModalStudy Report. If future development is, forexample, to be directed to the M18 corridor, theeffects on traffic levels on the motorways willneed careful consideration, this issue is cur-rently the subject of a memorandum of under-standing with the Highways Agency.

Given the above, it may be appropriate to con-centrate employment and residential develop-ment in the Eastern part of the borough andensure that adequate provision is made toallow easy access from the whole of theBorough to employment sites by public trans-port and road.

Should the majority of new development belocated where there is good access to thestrategic highway network?

ISSUE T2 - New Development andTransport Provision

Government planning guidance (PPG13) statesthat where developments will have significanttransport implications ‘Transport Assessments’should be prepared and submitted alongsidethe relevant planning applications. For majorproposals the assessment should illustrateaccessibility to the site by all modes and thelikely modal split of journeys to and from thesite. Where appropriate a travel plan should beincluded. The UDP will have to consider how tomanage traffic impacts arising from all newdevelopment, including how to provideincreased travel choice and reducing the needto travel, through the implementation of travelplans.

PPG13 also states that the development planshould indicate the likely nature and scope ofcontributions that will be sought towards trans-port improvements as part of development inparticular areas or on key sites. In some casescommuted payments may be appropriate, forexample, towards public transport infrastruc-ture. PPG13 also requires that maximum carparking standards are applied to larger com-mercial developments and recommends thatresidential developments have an averagenumber of parking spaces of no more than 1.5per dwelling.

10. Transport

6362

New developments need to take account of thehierarchy of transport users identified in the LTPwhen considering access to new sites. Thehierarchy prioritises pedestrians, people withdisabilities, cyclists and public transport abovecommercial vehicles and private cars.

Proposals for new development that are likelyto generate significant traffic movements will berequired to submit transport assessments ofpart of any planning application and whereappropriate produce travel plans that willdemonstrate how journeys by means otherthan the private car will be encouraged.

The reviewed plan will ensure that newdevelopment is well served by public transport. In addition, should the numberof parking spaces be restricted, for residential as well as commercial develop-ment, especially where sites are particular-ly well served by public transport?

ISSUE T3 - Public Transport - Bus & Rail Facilities

Public transport has an important role to play inreducing the harmful effects of travel while pro-moting economic prosperity and improvingpeoples quality of life, although it will never beable to meet all transport needs. Public trans-port has lower energy usage than cars andtakes up less road space, but it is essential thatpublic transport be made more convenient andattractive for usage to increase.

Issues that deter people include concerns overpersonal security and comfort and the intercon-nectivity of services.

Major public transport infrastructure is plannedin the near future in the Borough. Building workis planned to commence in early 2003 on amajor transport interchange scheme inDoncaster town centre. Plans are also pro-gressing for a number of priority bus corridorsstarting with the A638 between Woodlands andRossington. Park and ride sites are also beinglooked at in a number of locations, linked toQuality Bus Corridors. These schemes shouldencourage greater use of public transport forsome of the major routes in to Doncaster towncentre. To encourage use of public transportfurther, additional, smaller public transport facil-ities may be beneficial throughout the Borough.The South Yorkshire Rail Strategy, for example,proposes, the creation of a number of newlocal stations at various locations around theBorough. Land should also be identified andsafeguarded for potential public transport infra-structure, cycleway and road improvements butit may be appropriate to identify specific sites.

Should sites be identified for Park and Ridelocations, linked to improved public trans-port into Doncaster Town Centre?

Should land be safeguarded for new train stations and/or interchanges/mini interchanges at key locations throughoutthe Borough?

ISSUE T4 - Doncaster Town Centre Accessand Parking

The availability of car parking has a major influ-ence on people’s choice of means of transport;car parking also takes up a large amount ofspace in developments and reduces densities.Reducing the level of parking in new develop-ment (and in the expansion and change of useof existing development) is essential in promot-ing sustainable travel choices, avoiding thewasted costs to businesses of providing toomuch parking, and in tackling congestion whichmight otherwise detract from the convenience ofcar use and other road-based transport.

Care needs to be taken not to create perverseincentives for development to locate away fromtown centres, or threaten future levels of invest-ment in town centres, It should also beacknowledged that reducing congestion in andduring journeys to town centres will increasetheir attractiveness. National and regional guidance set maximum parking standards forbroad classes of development, the develop-ment plan will set more detailed maximumparking standards, that will be devised in part-nership with the other South YorkshireAuthorities. This, along with other measuresshould encourage people to make more sus-tainable transport choices and promote devel-opment in locations well served by public trans-port, and walking and cycling access.Maximum parking standards will also have tobe set for smaller developments; these will beset to reflect local circumstances.

Doncaster Town centre currently has just over 4500 off street parking spaces, includingCouncil and privately owned parking spaceswith an additional 463 Council controlledspaces being available at weekends.Historically occupancy rates for car parks in

Doncaster Town Centre have averaged 61%throughout most of the year, and between 71%and 86% over the Christmas period.

Various up coming projects will result in theloss of some spaces, either temporarily or per-manently, and some will create new spaces.The development of Doncaster Interchange, forexample, will create significant numbers ofspaces, however the Northern Bus Station carpark will be demolished to enable the develop-ment. Temporary parking will be provided dur-ing the period of construction. Other develop-ments, including those at Doncaster Waterfrontand Waterdale will result in the loss and cre-ation of parking spaces over time. The overalllevel of parking at any one time will change asthe various projects progress. Existing sparecapacity and improvements in informationregarding available parking spaces shouldmean that shortages will not occur.

Some existing car parks are regarded as unat-tractive and uninviting and many people feelunsafe in them. Regard will be given to theattractiveness and safety of any parking creat-ed as part of new development through theapplication of ‘secure by design’ principles.

Park and Ride sites are proposed at variousplaces throughout the Borough, the first phaseplans for two sites on the A638 at ParrotsCorner and Adwick Le Street. Each site will ini-tially cater for 200 parking spaces and it isenvisaged that these facilities, in conjunctionwith the Quality Bus Corridors and controls onlong stay parking Doncaster Town Centre, willencourage people to make more journeys bybus.

10. Transport

6362

New developments need to take account of thehierarchy of transport users identified in the LTPwhen considering access to new sites. Thehierarchy prioritises pedestrians, people withdisabilities, cyclists and public transport abovecommercial vehicles and private cars.

Proposals for new development that are likelyto generate significant traffic movements will berequired to submit transport assessments ofpart of any planning application and whereappropriate produce travel plans that willdemonstrate how journeys by means otherthan the private car will be encouraged.

The reviewed plan will ensure that newdevelopment is well served by public transport. In addition, should the numberof parking spaces be restricted, for residential as well as commercial develop-ment, especially where sites are particular-ly well served by public transport?

ISSUE T3 - Public Transport - Bus & Rail Facilities

Public transport has an important role to play inreducing the harmful effects of travel while pro-moting economic prosperity and improvingpeoples quality of life, although it will never beable to meet all transport needs. Public trans-port has lower energy usage than cars andtakes up less road space, but it is essential thatpublic transport be made more convenient andattractive for usage to increase.

Issues that deter people include concerns overpersonal security and comfort and the intercon-nectivity of services.

Major public transport infrastructure is plannedin the near future in the Borough. Building workis planned to commence in early 2003 on amajor transport interchange scheme inDoncaster town centre. Plans are also pro-gressing for a number of priority bus corridorsstarting with the A638 between Woodlands andRossington. Park and ride sites are also beinglooked at in a number of locations, linked toQuality Bus Corridors. These schemes shouldencourage greater use of public transport forsome of the major routes in to Doncaster towncentre. To encourage use of public transportfurther, additional, smaller public transport facil-ities may be beneficial throughout the Borough.The South Yorkshire Rail Strategy, for example,proposes, the creation of a number of newlocal stations at various locations around theBorough. Land should also be identified andsafeguarded for potential public transport infra-structure, cycleway and road improvements butit may be appropriate to identify specific sites.

Should sites be identified for Park and Ridelocations, linked to improved public trans-port into Doncaster Town Centre?

Should land be safeguarded for new train stations and/or interchanges/mini interchanges at key locations throughoutthe Borough?

ISSUE T4 - Doncaster Town Centre Accessand Parking

The availability of car parking has a major influ-ence on people’s choice of means of transport;car parking also takes up a large amount ofspace in developments and reduces densities.Reducing the level of parking in new develop-ment (and in the expansion and change of useof existing development) is essential in promot-ing sustainable travel choices, avoiding thewasted costs to businesses of providing toomuch parking, and in tackling congestion whichmight otherwise detract from the convenience ofcar use and other road-based transport.

Care needs to be taken not to create perverseincentives for development to locate away fromtown centres, or threaten future levels of invest-ment in town centres, It should also beacknowledged that reducing congestion in andduring journeys to town centres will increasetheir attractiveness. National and regional guidance set maximum parking standards forbroad classes of development, the develop-ment plan will set more detailed maximumparking standards, that will be devised in part-nership with the other South YorkshireAuthorities. This, along with other measuresshould encourage people to make more sus-tainable transport choices and promote devel-opment in locations well served by public trans-port, and walking and cycling access.Maximum parking standards will also have tobe set for smaller developments; these will beset to reflect local circumstances.

Doncaster Town centre currently has just over 4500 off street parking spaces, includingCouncil and privately owned parking spaceswith an additional 463 Council controlledspaces being available at weekends.Historically occupancy rates for car parks in

Doncaster Town Centre have averaged 61%throughout most of the year, and between 71%and 86% over the Christmas period.

Various up coming projects will result in theloss of some spaces, either temporarily or per-manently, and some will create new spaces.The development of Doncaster Interchange, forexample, will create significant numbers ofspaces, however the Northern Bus Station carpark will be demolished to enable the develop-ment. Temporary parking will be provided dur-ing the period of construction. Other develop-ments, including those at Doncaster Waterfrontand Waterdale will result in the loss and cre-ation of parking spaces over time. The overalllevel of parking at any one time will change asthe various projects progress. Existing sparecapacity and improvements in informationregarding available parking spaces shouldmean that shortages will not occur.

Some existing car parks are regarded as unat-tractive and uninviting and many people feelunsafe in them. Regard will be given to theattractiveness and safety of any parking creat-ed as part of new development through theapplication of ‘secure by design’ principles.

Park and Ride sites are proposed at variousplaces throughout the Borough, the first phaseplans for two sites on the A638 at ParrotsCorner and Adwick Le Street. Each site will ini-tially cater for 200 parking spaces and it isenvisaged that these facilities, in conjunctionwith the Quality Bus Corridors and controls onlong stay parking Doncaster Town Centre, willencourage people to make more journeys bybus.

10. Transport

65

10. Transport

64

Town Centres, as destinations, probably offerthe greatest opportunity for providing a widechoice of transport options. In addition to this,new facilities in the form of the Interchange,quality bus corridors, and park and ride siteswill provide further opportunities for reducingthe level of car journeys to Doncaster towncentre. However substantial provision for carparking will still be required in the town centre,and this need will have to be tailored to meetthe needs of a variety of users and locations.The Council has produced a car parking frame-work that details the approach to managing carparking in the town centre.

With respect to car parking in DoncasterTown Centre, which of the following statements do you agree with?

● The existing amount of car parking is about right.

● There should be more surface level parking

● There should be more multi-storey car parking

● Some existing car parks should be re-developed for other town centre uses.

ISSUE T5 - Walking and Cycling

Walking is an important mode of travel at thelocal level and offers the greatest potential toreplace short car trips, walking also often formspart of a longer journey by other modes.Cycling also has potential to substitute for shortcar trips, and to form part of a longer journeyby public transport. Walking and cycling alsoprovides health benefits both to the travellerand the wider community, providing exerciseand reducing pollution and traffic congestion.

There are, however, obstacles to increasedwalking and cycling, these include issues relat-ing to length of journey, comfort, and risk tosafety, both perceived and actual. Problems,both for pedestrians and cyclists are oftenrelate to the design of existing highway infra-structure. Lack of safe, secure storage for bicy-cles is also often a problem.

Locating new development close to existingcentres of activity and services helps to facili-tate shorter trips. Facilities for cycle storageand other related facilities in new developmentsand transport interchanges should also makecycling a more attractive option. Giving pedes-trians and cyclists priority in new and existingdevelopments, should make both modes oftransport more attractive.

Should existing highway space currentlydedicated to vehicular traffic be given overto pedestrian and cycle use?

ISSUE T6 - Major Infrastructure Projects

Below is a list of proposed major infrastructureprojects, some of which are detailed in theexisting UDP. These have been identified asprojects that need to be addressed in someform in the new development plan. These pro-posals originated from various sources, someof the proposals are already in an advancedstate of development. Those with planning per-mission will be included in the Reviewed UDPas commitments. In particular:-

Doncaster Interchange ; This proposeddevelopment already has planning permissionand includes a new bus station to replace theexisting two, linked to the railway station, carparking and major retail development linkingthe transport facilities to Doncaster town centre. It is planned that construction will startearly in 2003.

And a Proposed Airport at former RAFFinningley ; This is a proposal for the re-development of the former RAF Finningley as acommercial airport, planned to have a capacityof 2.3 million passengers and 60,000 tonnes offreight per year by 2014. A decision on plan-ning permission is awaited following a publicinquiry in 2001/02.

Other Transport Schemes as yet withoutplanning permission include;-

Scheme A - M18/A638 Rossington Link RoadThis is a proposed link from the M18 toRossington, possibly as part of a link road tothe proposed Finningley Airport, intended toaddress the relative isolation of Rossingtonfrom the strategic highway network and assistregeneration

Scheme B - M18/B6094 Conisbrough Link RoadThis is a proposed link from the M18 to theA630, achieved by upgrading the B 6094 andcreating a junction with the Motorway. It isintended to address the relative isolation of thispart of the Borough from the strategic highwaynetwork and assist regeneration.

Scheme C - M18/M180 Hatfield Link RoadThis is a proposed link from the M18 toHatfield, intended to improve links to the strate-gic highway network for Hatfield and Stainforth,and assist regeneration.

Scheme D- M18 Finningley Airport Link Road

If the airport is developed it is envisaged that,in the long term, a dedicated link to the strate-gic highway network will be needed. This is aproposed link from the M18 to the proposed

airport, intended to meet the long term needsof the airport. It may be connected to theM18/A638 Rossington Link Road or alternative-ly join the Motorway at another point. A numberof alternative route options are likely to be con-sidered.

Scheme E- A1/A19 Carcroft link Road

This scheme would form a direct link betweenthe A1 and the A19 to address the relative iso-lation of Carcroft from the strategic highwaynetwork and assist regeneration.

Scheme F - White Rose Way (A6182) DuallingThis is the proposed dualling of the remainingsingle carriageway section of the A6182 –White Rose Way, in order to accommodate thetraffic generated by new development in thisarea.

Scheme G - A651 Hickleton By-Pass,A651 Marr By-PassThese schemes form part of the Dearne TownsLink Road Connecting the M1 at Tankersley tothe A1(M) East of Marr.

Scheme H- A60/A6182 Woodfield Link Road

This road would run from the A60 Tickhill Roadto the A618 at Balby Carr Roundabout.

Scheme I - Additional local Railway StationsAdditional local Railway Stations are suggestedin the South Yorkshire Rail Plan at the followinglocations:-

Moorends, Askern, Adwick (relocation of theexisting station), Balby, Bessacarr, Rossingtonand Bawtry.

10. Transport

65

10. Transport

64

Town Centres, as destinations, probably offerthe greatest opportunity for providing a widechoice of transport options. In addition to this,new facilities in the form of the Interchange,quality bus corridors, and park and ride siteswill provide further opportunities for reducingthe level of car journeys to Doncaster towncentre. However substantial provision for carparking will still be required in the town centre,and this need will have to be tailored to meetthe needs of a variety of users and locations.The Council has produced a car parking frame-work that details the approach to managing carparking in the town centre.

With respect to car parking in DoncasterTown Centre, which of the following statements do you agree with?

● The existing amount of car parking is about right.

● There should be more surface level parking

● There should be more multi-storey car parking

● Some existing car parks should be re-developed for other town centre uses.

ISSUE T5 - Walking and Cycling

Walking is an important mode of travel at thelocal level and offers the greatest potential toreplace short car trips, walking also often formspart of a longer journey by other modes.Cycling also has potential to substitute for shortcar trips, and to form part of a longer journeyby public transport. Walking and cycling alsoprovides health benefits both to the travellerand the wider community, providing exerciseand reducing pollution and traffic congestion.

There are, however, obstacles to increasedwalking and cycling, these include issues relat-ing to length of journey, comfort, and risk tosafety, both perceived and actual. Problems,both for pedestrians and cyclists are oftenrelate to the design of existing highway infra-structure. Lack of safe, secure storage for bicy-cles is also often a problem.

Locating new development close to existingcentres of activity and services helps to facili-tate shorter trips. Facilities for cycle storageand other related facilities in new developmentsand transport interchanges should also makecycling a more attractive option. Giving pedes-trians and cyclists priority in new and existingdevelopments, should make both modes oftransport more attractive.

Should existing highway space currentlydedicated to vehicular traffic be given overto pedestrian and cycle use?

ISSUE T6 - Major Infrastructure Projects

Below is a list of proposed major infrastructureprojects, some of which are detailed in theexisting UDP. These have been identified asprojects that need to be addressed in someform in the new development plan. These pro-posals originated from various sources, someof the proposals are already in an advancedstate of development. Those with planning per-mission will be included in the Reviewed UDPas commitments. In particular:-

Doncaster Interchange ; This proposeddevelopment already has planning permissionand includes a new bus station to replace theexisting two, linked to the railway station, carparking and major retail development linkingthe transport facilities to Doncaster town centre. It is planned that construction will startearly in 2003.

And a Proposed Airport at former RAFFinningley ; This is a proposal for the re-development of the former RAF Finningley as acommercial airport, planned to have a capacityof 2.3 million passengers and 60,000 tonnes offreight per year by 2014. A decision on plan-ning permission is awaited following a publicinquiry in 2001/02.

Other Transport Schemes as yet withoutplanning permission include;-

Scheme A - M18/A638 Rossington Link RoadThis is a proposed link from the M18 toRossington, possibly as part of a link road tothe proposed Finningley Airport, intended toaddress the relative isolation of Rossingtonfrom the strategic highway network and assistregeneration

Scheme B - M18/B6094 Conisbrough Link RoadThis is a proposed link from the M18 to theA630, achieved by upgrading the B 6094 andcreating a junction with the Motorway. It isintended to address the relative isolation of thispart of the Borough from the strategic highwaynetwork and assist regeneration.

Scheme C - M18/M180 Hatfield Link RoadThis is a proposed link from the M18 toHatfield, intended to improve links to the strate-gic highway network for Hatfield and Stainforth,and assist regeneration.

Scheme D- M18 Finningley Airport Link Road

If the airport is developed it is envisaged that,in the long term, a dedicated link to the strate-gic highway network will be needed. This is aproposed link from the M18 to the proposed

airport, intended to meet the long term needsof the airport. It may be connected to theM18/A638 Rossington Link Road or alternative-ly join the Motorway at another point. A numberof alternative route options are likely to be con-sidered.

Scheme E- A1/A19 Carcroft link Road

This scheme would form a direct link betweenthe A1 and the A19 to address the relative iso-lation of Carcroft from the strategic highwaynetwork and assist regeneration.

Scheme F - White Rose Way (A6182) DuallingThis is the proposed dualling of the remainingsingle carriageway section of the A6182 –White Rose Way, in order to accommodate thetraffic generated by new development in thisarea.

Scheme G - A651 Hickleton By-Pass,A651 Marr By-PassThese schemes form part of the Dearne TownsLink Road Connecting the M1 at Tankersley tothe A1(M) East of Marr.

Scheme H- A60/A6182 Woodfield Link Road

This road would run from the A60 Tickhill Roadto the A618 at Balby Carr Roundabout.

Scheme I - Additional local Railway StationsAdditional local Railway Stations are suggestedin the South Yorkshire Rail Plan at the followinglocations:-

Moorends, Askern, Adwick (relocation of theexisting station), Balby, Bessacarr, Rossingtonand Bawtry.

67

10. Transport

66

Scheme J - Doncaster Parkway StationA possible new station on the East Coast MainLine to the South East of Doncaster has beenproposed by GNER. It would aim to attractmore passengers to the rail network for longdistance trips, as an alternative to the car.

Scheme K - Quality Bus Corridors The first of these proposals contained in theLocal Transport Plan (LTP) is for public trans-port priority measures to be developed alongthe A638 from Adwick-le-Street to North Bridgeand through Bessacarr to Rossington.Providing Bus Priority and linking proposedpark and ride sites at Parrots Corner andAdwick-le-Street, further Quality Bus Corridorselsewhere in the Borough are envisaged.

Scheme L - Park and RideThe first of these proposals, contained in theLocal Transport Plan (LTP) is for park and ridesites at Parrots Corner (junction of the A638Bawtry road and the B6463 Sheep BridgeLane) and around the junction of the A638 andthe B1220, at Adwick-le-Street. They are intend-ed to link car trips to bus routes along the firstof the proposed Quality Bus Corridors, furtherschemes are envisaged.

Scheme M - East Cost Main LineA series of improvements are planned to theEast Cost Main Line, intended to separatefreight traffic from the higher speed passengerservices on this national rail route, to improvecapacity of the East Cost Main Line for passen-ger services.

Do you support schemes A to M ? If so which ones?

Are there any projects not included in thislist that should be?

There are also a number of other more minorprojects listed in the existing UDP and a list ofroad improvement lines protected from devel-opment in Appendix 7 of the adopted UDP. Theinclusion of these schemes in the new develop-ment plan will be reviewed. The list of minorschemes is contained in Supporting DocumentSD12

ISSUE T7 - Doncaster Finningley Airport

The site of the former Finningley Airbase wasvacated by the RAF in 1996. The site compris-es a 2.7km runway, 28 ha of developable landalongside the runway and 50,000 sq meters offloorspace. In November 1999, Peel Holdings,submitted a planning application for a commer-cial civil airport for 2.3 million passengers peryear (mppa) and 60,000 tonnes of freight peryear by 2014. The Council resolved to supportthe application subject to conditions, legalagreement and memo of understanding relat-ing to the provision a road link to the M18. Theapplication was then the subject of a PublicInquiry that concluded after 6 months in March2002. A decision is awaited from the Office ofthe Deputy Prime Minister on the planningapplication and can reasonably expected inearly 2003.

There is a great deal of evidence that the pro-posed airport will bring economic benefits bothto Doncaster and the wider region. However,there are environmental concerns to take intoaccount and the benefits need to be balancedagainst the economic advantages. The airport,like any other, will have an environmentalimpact through noise, additional traffic and ifsuccessful may increase demand for additionaldevelopment land. The existing proposals havein place agreements with the developer tomanage noise impact to keep it to an accept-able level.

Agreements are also in place to monitor healthand natural habitat impact, green transportplan, local training and job recruitment plan.

Government policy relating to airports is stillemerging, with Regional ConsultationDocuments (RCD) just having been produced,the RCD relevant to Finningley suggests thatthe airport may be handling 5 mppa by 2030.

Policy T9 of Regional Planning Guidance(RPG12) states, among other things, that peo-ple and business should have good access toa range of air services and that the differingroles of airports should be recognised. In addi-tion the RPG sets a target of 20% of journeys toairports to be by public transport by 2016. TheLocal Transport Plan welcomes the growth ofair travel from the sub-region as it reduces theneed for surface travel to more distant airports.

Policy T36 of the Unitary Development Plandeals with the site both while still used as anRAF base and in the event of its closure. Thesupporting text of Policy T35 points to the pos-sibility of the sites use as a civil airport.

During its assessment of the airport planningapplication, the Council had the aviation andjob forecasts independently assessed and thisconcluded that by 2014 the airport proposalscould be expected to provide around 2000 jobsat the airport and create 5030 – 5270 otherjobs.

Elsewhere airports have been shown to have acatalytic effect on the economy as an attractorto inward investors who need access to air-ports and who might contribute to overallgrowth in development. In addition the airportwill improve the image of the area and providea boost to confidence in the local employmentmarket.

The airport proposals, if approved, will createemployment opportunities and attract inwardinvestment into Doncaster. A key issue is toensure that residents from deprived communi-ties have access to employment opportunitiescreated.

How should residents from deprived communities access the job opportunitiesproposed to be created by the airportdevelopment at Finningley?

The Finningley Airbase has excellent surfaceaccess potential and the Council is looking atidentifying a link from the M18 to the proposedairport. If approved, the airport operator willdevelop a rail station alongside the airport andprovide shuttle buses to the DoncasterInterchange. The airport proposals include aterminal transport interchange. In the longerterm there are opportunities, dependant on theairports success for links to the East CoastMainline.

67

10. Transport

66

Scheme J - Doncaster Parkway StationA possible new station on the East Coast MainLine to the South East of Doncaster has beenproposed by GNER. It would aim to attractmore passengers to the rail network for longdistance trips, as an alternative to the car.

Scheme K - Quality Bus Corridors The first of these proposals contained in theLocal Transport Plan (LTP) is for public trans-port priority measures to be developed alongthe A638 from Adwick-le-Street to North Bridgeand through Bessacarr to Rossington.Providing Bus Priority and linking proposedpark and ride sites at Parrots Corner andAdwick-le-Street, further Quality Bus Corridorselsewhere in the Borough are envisaged.

Scheme L - Park and RideThe first of these proposals, contained in theLocal Transport Plan (LTP) is for park and ridesites at Parrots Corner (junction of the A638Bawtry road and the B6463 Sheep BridgeLane) and around the junction of the A638 andthe B1220, at Adwick-le-Street. They are intend-ed to link car trips to bus routes along the firstof the proposed Quality Bus Corridors, furtherschemes are envisaged.

Scheme M - East Cost Main LineA series of improvements are planned to theEast Cost Main Line, intended to separatefreight traffic from the higher speed passengerservices on this national rail route, to improvecapacity of the East Cost Main Line for passen-ger services.

Do you support schemes A to M ? If so which ones?

Are there any projects not included in thislist that should be?

There are also a number of other more minorprojects listed in the existing UDP and a list ofroad improvement lines protected from devel-opment in Appendix 7 of the adopted UDP. Theinclusion of these schemes in the new develop-ment plan will be reviewed. The list of minorschemes is contained in Supporting DocumentSD12

ISSUE T7 - Doncaster Finningley Airport

The site of the former Finningley Airbase wasvacated by the RAF in 1996. The site compris-es a 2.7km runway, 28 ha of developable landalongside the runway and 50,000 sq meters offloorspace. In November 1999, Peel Holdings,submitted a planning application for a commer-cial civil airport for 2.3 million passengers peryear (mppa) and 60,000 tonnes of freight peryear by 2014. The Council resolved to supportthe application subject to conditions, legalagreement and memo of understanding relat-ing to the provision a road link to the M18. Theapplication was then the subject of a PublicInquiry that concluded after 6 months in March2002. A decision is awaited from the Office ofthe Deputy Prime Minister on the planningapplication and can reasonably expected inearly 2003.

There is a great deal of evidence that the pro-posed airport will bring economic benefits bothto Doncaster and the wider region. However,there are environmental concerns to take intoaccount and the benefits need to be balancedagainst the economic advantages. The airport,like any other, will have an environmentalimpact through noise, additional traffic and ifsuccessful may increase demand for additionaldevelopment land. The existing proposals havein place agreements with the developer tomanage noise impact to keep it to an accept-able level.

Agreements are also in place to monitor healthand natural habitat impact, green transportplan, local training and job recruitment plan.

Government policy relating to airports is stillemerging, with Regional ConsultationDocuments (RCD) just having been produced,the RCD relevant to Finningley suggests thatthe airport may be handling 5 mppa by 2030.

Policy T9 of Regional Planning Guidance(RPG12) states, among other things, that peo-ple and business should have good access toa range of air services and that the differingroles of airports should be recognised. In addi-tion the RPG sets a target of 20% of journeys toairports to be by public transport by 2016. TheLocal Transport Plan welcomes the growth ofair travel from the sub-region as it reduces theneed for surface travel to more distant airports.

Policy T36 of the Unitary Development Plandeals with the site both while still used as anRAF base and in the event of its closure. Thesupporting text of Policy T35 points to the pos-sibility of the sites use as a civil airport.

During its assessment of the airport planningapplication, the Council had the aviation andjob forecasts independently assessed and thisconcluded that by 2014 the airport proposalscould be expected to provide around 2000 jobsat the airport and create 5030 – 5270 otherjobs.

Elsewhere airports have been shown to have acatalytic effect on the economy as an attractorto inward investors who need access to air-ports and who might contribute to overallgrowth in development. In addition the airportwill improve the image of the area and providea boost to confidence in the local employmentmarket.

The airport proposals, if approved, will createemployment opportunities and attract inwardinvestment into Doncaster. A key issue is toensure that residents from deprived communi-ties have access to employment opportunitiescreated.

How should residents from deprived communities access the job opportunitiesproposed to be created by the airportdevelopment at Finningley?

The Finningley Airbase has excellent surfaceaccess potential and the Council is looking atidentifying a link from the M18 to the proposedairport. If approved, the airport operator willdevelop a rail station alongside the airport andprovide shuttle buses to the DoncasterInterchange. The airport proposals include aterminal transport interchange. In the longerterm there are opportunities, dependant on theairports success for links to the East CoastMainline.

11. Minerals

69

10. Transport

68

The site is located near to the strategic trans-port network, principally the regional rail net-work, east coast mainline and motorways, andif well connected and integrated with the pro-posed airport, they can provide a widelyaccessed airport and look forward to achievinghigh public transport targets. The Council islooking at the best route for a link road from theairbase site to the M18. There are proposals fora gateway station in Doncaster, which need tobe considered alongside the airport proposals.Also of increasing importance are broadbandtelecommunication links and these are of rele-vance to the future of the airbase. If approved,Doncaster Finningley Airport therefore has thepotential of providing an integrated transportinterchange with other transport components inDoncaster.

The UDP review will need to bring forward pro-posals of integrating airport proposals into thestrategic transport structure in order to providequality accessibility to air services by both pub-lic and private transport, maximise the opportu-nities for aviation clustering, protect the amenityof communities and environment, enable thejob opportunities to be accessed from deprivedcommunities and enable the benefits of the air-port to be spread into other strategic economiczones.

What transport provisions need to beincluded in the UDP now to ensureFinningley Airport is integrated into thefuture strategic transport network?

OTHER ISSUES.

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP transport policiesincluding those which:

● Promote investment in the highway network to promote its efficient use, economic growth and improvements in the environment and safety.

● Locate development where it can be accommodated by the transport network including maximising the possibility of access by public transport.

● Support and encourage innovative forms of public transport in addition to bus services in urban and rural areas.

● Encourage the use of transport means other than the highway for developments involving the movement of materials of substantial volume.

● Protect existing public rights of way and ensure that new developments link effectively with them and develop the cycle route network.

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies to:

● Reduce reliance on the private car as the primary means of transport by increasing the attractiveness of other modes of transport through a variety of means and controlling car use through parking and other controls.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD10 Transport – Impact of other policies and strategies.

SD11 Detailed considerations relating to Finningley Airport.

SD12 Existing road lines protected from development in the adopted UDP.

INTRODUCTION

The geology of Doncaster includes significantand varied mineral deposits.

The current UDP notes that Doncaster has verysubstantial deposits of coal, limestone, sandand gravel and peat, all of which have beenworked for many years. In recent years, naturalgas and oil prospecting has established thepresence of natural or petroleum gas, and thereare now a number of producing natural gaswells. In addition to natural or petroleum gas, anumber of applications have been submittedrecently for the exploitation of coalminemethane, which is methane gas that has collected within the void spaces in old mineworkings. It is also expected that, in the future,there will be some demand for clay materials, inparticular for the lining of landfill sites.

For aggregate minerals, extraction takes placefrom low lying sand and gravel deposits in theeast of the Borough and from deposits of magnesian limestone in the west of theBorough. The magnesian limestone extractedin Doncaster is used both as an aggregatemineral and as an industrial mineral.Production of sand and gravel and limestoneaverages some 5/6 million tonnes per annum.

Peat extraction is concentrated on Thorne andHatfield Moors, the largest peat extraction sitesin the country, supplying over 50% of the country’s peat. Agreement has, however, recently been reached between the operatorsand English Nature to cease extraction immediately from Thorne Moor and to ceaseextraction within two /three years on HatfieldMoor.

Although the deep mined coal industry hasdeclined nationally, within Doncaster there arestill two operational deep mines (at Hatfield /

Stainforth and Rossington) with a third, atThorne, being held on a care and maintenancebasis. There are, in addition, deep mines on theboundary of Doncaster, at Harworth and Maltby.Colliery spoil from Maltby is deposited within thelarge limestone-quarrying complex at Stainton.

As well as deep deposits of coal, on the eastern boundary of the Borough there areshallow deposits of coal and there is likely tobe some interest in working such shallowdeposits

Doncaster is therefore a major producer ofaggregates, coal and peat and makes a significant contribution to meeting the UK’sdemand for these minerals. Mineral extractionis a vital part of the local and national economybut can, however, often involve environmentaland amenity issues.

KEY FACTS

● Doncaster has very substantial deposits of aggregate minerals (limestone/crushedrock, sand and gravel), coal and peat, all of which have been worked for many years. Natural gas and, recently, coalmine methane is also exploited. Doncaster has, however, only two remaining operational deep coalmines, and peat extraction on Thorne and Hatfield Moors is to cease in recognition of their international importance for natureconservation.

● Production of aggregates averages some 5/6 million tones per annum.

● Doncaster has a landbank (a stock of planning permissions) for crushed rock in excess of thirty years and a landbank for (undifferentiated) sand and gravel in excess of twenty years.

11. Minerals

69

10. Transport

68

The site is located near to the strategic trans-port network, principally the regional rail net-work, east coast mainline and motorways, andif well connected and integrated with the pro-posed airport, they can provide a widelyaccessed airport and look forward to achievinghigh public transport targets. The Council islooking at the best route for a link road from theairbase site to the M18. There are proposals fora gateway station in Doncaster, which need tobe considered alongside the airport proposals.Also of increasing importance are broadbandtelecommunication links and these are of rele-vance to the future of the airbase. If approved,Doncaster Finningley Airport therefore has thepotential of providing an integrated transportinterchange with other transport components inDoncaster.

The UDP review will need to bring forward pro-posals of integrating airport proposals into thestrategic transport structure in order to providequality accessibility to air services by both pub-lic and private transport, maximise the opportu-nities for aviation clustering, protect the amenityof communities and environment, enable thejob opportunities to be accessed from deprivedcommunities and enable the benefits of the air-port to be spread into other strategic economiczones.

What transport provisions need to beincluded in the UDP now to ensureFinningley Airport is integrated into thefuture strategic transport network?

OTHER ISSUES.

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP transport policiesincluding those which:

● Promote investment in the highway network to promote its efficient use, economic growth and improvements in the environment and safety.

● Locate development where it can be accommodated by the transport network including maximising the possibility of access by public transport.

● Support and encourage innovative forms of public transport in addition to bus services in urban and rural areas.

● Encourage the use of transport means other than the highway for developments involving the movement of materials of substantial volume.

● Protect existing public rights of way and ensure that new developments link effectively with them and develop the cycle route network.

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies to:

● Reduce reliance on the private car as the primary means of transport by increasing the attractiveness of other modes of transport through a variety of means and controlling car use through parking and other controls.

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD10 Transport – Impact of other policies and strategies.

SD11 Detailed considerations relating to Finningley Airport.

SD12 Existing road lines protected from development in the adopted UDP.

INTRODUCTION

The geology of Doncaster includes significantand varied mineral deposits.

The current UDP notes that Doncaster has verysubstantial deposits of coal, limestone, sandand gravel and peat, all of which have beenworked for many years. In recent years, naturalgas and oil prospecting has established thepresence of natural or petroleum gas, and thereare now a number of producing natural gaswells. In addition to natural or petroleum gas, anumber of applications have been submittedrecently for the exploitation of coalminemethane, which is methane gas that has collected within the void spaces in old mineworkings. It is also expected that, in the future,there will be some demand for clay materials, inparticular for the lining of landfill sites.

For aggregate minerals, extraction takes placefrom low lying sand and gravel deposits in theeast of the Borough and from deposits of magnesian limestone in the west of theBorough. The magnesian limestone extractedin Doncaster is used both as an aggregatemineral and as an industrial mineral.Production of sand and gravel and limestoneaverages some 5/6 million tonnes per annum.

Peat extraction is concentrated on Thorne andHatfield Moors, the largest peat extraction sitesin the country, supplying over 50% of the country’s peat. Agreement has, however, recently been reached between the operatorsand English Nature to cease extraction immediately from Thorne Moor and to ceaseextraction within two /three years on HatfieldMoor.

Although the deep mined coal industry hasdeclined nationally, within Doncaster there arestill two operational deep mines (at Hatfield /

Stainforth and Rossington) with a third, atThorne, being held on a care and maintenancebasis. There are, in addition, deep mines on theboundary of Doncaster, at Harworth and Maltby.Colliery spoil from Maltby is deposited within thelarge limestone-quarrying complex at Stainton.

As well as deep deposits of coal, on the eastern boundary of the Borough there areshallow deposits of coal and there is likely tobe some interest in working such shallowdeposits

Doncaster is therefore a major producer ofaggregates, coal and peat and makes a significant contribution to meeting the UK’sdemand for these minerals. Mineral extractionis a vital part of the local and national economybut can, however, often involve environmentaland amenity issues.

KEY FACTS

● Doncaster has very substantial deposits of aggregate minerals (limestone/crushedrock, sand and gravel), coal and peat, all of which have been worked for many years. Natural gas and, recently, coalmine methane is also exploited. Doncaster has, however, only two remaining operational deep coalmines, and peat extraction on Thorne and Hatfield Moors is to cease in recognition of their international importance for natureconservation.

● Production of aggregates averages some 5/6 million tones per annum.

● Doncaster has a landbank (a stock of planning permissions) for crushed rock in excess of thirty years and a landbank for (undifferentiated) sand and gravel in excess of twenty years.

11. Minerals

7170

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Conserve minerals as far as possible, whilst ensuring an adequate supply to meet needs

● Ensure that the environmental and traffic impacts of mineral operations are kept, asfar as possible, to an acceptable minimum

● Minimise production of waste and encourage efficient use of materials, including appropriate use of high quality materials, and waste recycling

● Encourage sensitive working, restoration and aftercare practices so as to preserve or enhance the overall quality of the environment

● Protect areas of designated landscape or nature conservation value from development, other than in exceptional circumstances and where it has been demonstrated that development is in the public interest

● Prevent the unnecessary sterilization of mineral resources.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Includes policies for the extraction of a wide variety of minerals including coal, limestone, sand and gravel, peat, natural gas and oil.

● Designates preferred areas for the extraction of limestone

● Designates Preferred Areas and Areas of Search for sand and gravel

Issue M1 – Designation of Land forLimestone Extraction

Three Preferred Areas for limestone extractionwere designated in the UDP. For two of theseAreas planning permissions have been grantedcovering most of the designated PreferredAreas. For the third Area, applications havebeen submitted and negotiations are currentlytaking place over the details of the proposedworkings. As noted above, Doncaster has a"landbank” for crushed rock of 32 years, and,on the face of it, there seems little need to des-ignate additional land for limestone extraction.There may, however, as with sand and gravel,be economic arguments for particular specifi-cations of limestone, for example specialisedindustrial limestone.

Do you think that additional land should bedesignated for limestone extraction?

Issue M2 – Designation of Land for Sandand Gravel extraction

The current UDP notes that, by their nature,sand and gravel deposits are variable and thatconsequently there is uncertainty over the qual-ity and quantity of resources. The UDP desig-nates Preferred Areas, where there was suffi-cient geological knowledge, and Areas ofSearch, where geological knowledge was lesscertain. UDP policies state that the PreferredAreas should be worked first, unless they havebeen shown to be unworkable. Some of thePreferred Areas have, in the event, remainedunworked.

As with limestone, Doncaster has a significant"landbank" for sand and gravel, in excess of 20years. Unlike limestone, however, there are significant areas of land, which have been designated for sand and gravel extraction inthe UDP, which remain without planning permission and unworked. The situation withsand and gravel, however, is complicated bydistinct variations in the nature and demand fordifferent types of sand and gravel.

The sand and gravel deposits in the east of theBorough consist of shallow superficial or sur-face deposits of sand and gravel, underlain bythe Sherwood (or Bunter) sandstone. TheSherwood sandstone is weakly consolidatedsandstone that can be worked to produce asoft or building sand.

In other areas of the country, for example theadjacent mpas of Nottinghamshire and NorthYorkshire, soft sand is distinguished from sandand gravel, and this distinction could beapplied to Doncaster. Although there are con-siderable reserves of sand and gravel withinDoncaster, the industry over recent years hasclaimed that there are shortages of sharp sand,

and gravel. It is hoped that the 2001 AggregateMinerals Survey, collated by the Yorkshire andthe Humber Regional Aggregates WorkingParty (RAWP) will be able to establish thereserves available for different types of sandand gravel. It is expected that the results of thesurvey will be published in October 2002.

Do you think that soft sand should be distinguished from sand and gravel in theUDP Review?

Do you think that additional land should bedesignated for either soft sand or sand andgravel extraction?

Do you think that those areas which havebeen designated in the UDP for sand andgravel extraction, and which remainunworked, should be deleted as designated areas in the UDP Review?

11. Minerals

7170

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Conserve minerals as far as possible, whilst ensuring an adequate supply to meet needs

● Ensure that the environmental and traffic impacts of mineral operations are kept, asfar as possible, to an acceptable minimum

● Minimise production of waste and encourage efficient use of materials, including appropriate use of high quality materials, and waste recycling

● Encourage sensitive working, restoration and aftercare practices so as to preserve or enhance the overall quality of the environment

● Protect areas of designated landscape or nature conservation value from development, other than in exceptional circumstances and where it has been demonstrated that development is in the public interest

● Prevent the unnecessary sterilization of mineral resources.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Includes policies for the extraction of a wide variety of minerals including coal, limestone, sand and gravel, peat, natural gas and oil.

● Designates preferred areas for the extraction of limestone

● Designates Preferred Areas and Areas of Search for sand and gravel

Issue M1 – Designation of Land forLimestone Extraction

Three Preferred Areas for limestone extractionwere designated in the UDP. For two of theseAreas planning permissions have been grantedcovering most of the designated PreferredAreas. For the third Area, applications havebeen submitted and negotiations are currentlytaking place over the details of the proposedworkings. As noted above, Doncaster has a"landbank” for crushed rock of 32 years, and,on the face of it, there seems little need to des-ignate additional land for limestone extraction.There may, however, as with sand and gravel,be economic arguments for particular specifi-cations of limestone, for example specialisedindustrial limestone.

Do you think that additional land should bedesignated for limestone extraction?

Issue M2 – Designation of Land for Sandand Gravel extraction

The current UDP notes that, by their nature,sand and gravel deposits are variable and thatconsequently there is uncertainty over the qual-ity and quantity of resources. The UDP desig-nates Preferred Areas, where there was suffi-cient geological knowledge, and Areas ofSearch, where geological knowledge was lesscertain. UDP policies state that the PreferredAreas should be worked first, unless they havebeen shown to be unworkable. Some of thePreferred Areas have, in the event, remainedunworked.

As with limestone, Doncaster has a significant"landbank" for sand and gravel, in excess of 20years. Unlike limestone, however, there are significant areas of land, which have been designated for sand and gravel extraction inthe UDP, which remain without planning permission and unworked. The situation withsand and gravel, however, is complicated bydistinct variations in the nature and demand fordifferent types of sand and gravel.

The sand and gravel deposits in the east of theBorough consist of shallow superficial or sur-face deposits of sand and gravel, underlain bythe Sherwood (or Bunter) sandstone. TheSherwood sandstone is weakly consolidatedsandstone that can be worked to produce asoft or building sand.

In other areas of the country, for example theadjacent mpas of Nottinghamshire and NorthYorkshire, soft sand is distinguished from sandand gravel, and this distinction could beapplied to Doncaster. Although there are con-siderable reserves of sand and gravel withinDoncaster, the industry over recent years hasclaimed that there are shortages of sharp sand,

and gravel. It is hoped that the 2001 AggregateMinerals Survey, collated by the Yorkshire andthe Humber Regional Aggregates WorkingParty (RAWP) will be able to establish thereserves available for different types of sandand gravel. It is expected that the results of thesurvey will be published in October 2002.

Do you think that soft sand should be distinguished from sand and gravel in theUDP Review?

Do you think that additional land should bedesignated for either soft sand or sand andgravel extraction?

Do you think that those areas which havebeen designated in the UDP for sand andgravel extraction, and which remainunworked, should be deleted as designated areas in the UDP Review?

12. Waste

73

11. Minerals

72

Issue M3 – Peat

The large peat bogs of Thorne, Hatfield andGoole Moors are of international importance fornature conservation and have recently beendesignated, in part, as Special Protection Areas(SPA) / Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)under European legislation.

The Borough Council, along with the neigh-bouring authorities of the East Riding ofYorkshire and North Lincolnshire, have formedthe Peatland Partnership Group (PPG) to dealwith planning issues relating to the Europeandesignation of the peat extraction sites ofThorne, Hatfield and Goole Moors. The PPG iscurrently carrying out an "appropriate assess-ment" of the existing planning permissions forpeat extraction granted many years ago, underthe provisions of the Review procedures of theHabitats Regulations 1994, of the effects ofpeat extraction on the conservation value of theMoors. If the "appropriate assessment" findsthat continued peat extraction is having anunacceptable impact on the Moors then suchplanning permissions must be revoked. Therevocation of a planning permission will, however, involve compensation to be paid bythe local authorities to the landowners.

The Government has stated that it will reim-burse local authorities in this situation, but onlyif the local authorities can demonstrate thatthey have followed Government guidance in therevocation procedures; such guidance requiresdetailed negotiations with the landowners overa range of issues, including the possible provision of alternative sites.

This initiative under the Review procedures has,to a certain extent, been somewhat overtakenby the recent announcement of the agreementbetween English Nature and the operators(Scotts) to cease peat extraction immediatelyon Thorne Moor and to cease extraction onHatfield Moor within three years.

Do you think that the Borough Council, aspart of the Peatland Partnership Group,should continue to carry out an "appropriate assessment" of the existingplanning permissions for peat extraction?

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD13 Minerals – Impact of other policies and strategies.

INTRODUCTION

The existing UDP waste policies, the produc-tion of which was commenced in the early1990’s, are based on Government guidancecurrent at the time, and Doncaster’s WasteDisposal Plan, published in 1991. Even at thisdate, however, it was apparent that waste man-agement regimes were in an era of change,both in terms of policy/statutory approachesand technology, and the UDP not only refers tobut also, in certain respects, anticipates andmakes provision for, these changes. TheEnvironmental Protection Act 1990, whichsuperseded the Control of Pollution Act 1974,brought fundamental changes to the wastemanagement regime, in particular to the dis-charge of the household waste disposal func-tion (including the operation of Civic Amenitysites) which, up until then, had largely beencarried out by local authorities. In Doncaster aprivate sector company now carries out thisrole (although the Borough Council, togetherwith Barnsley and Rotherham Councils, have atotal of 20% interest in this company) on arenewable contract basis secured by competi-tive tender. In addition to these changes, the1990’s also saw the setting up of theEnvironment Agency, which took over the wastemanagement licensing functions from localauthorities, and the introduction of the landfilltax.

Strategic Planning Guidance for SouthYorkshire and Doncaster’s approved WasteDisposal Plan both recognise that landfill willremain the main method of disposal fordomestic and commercial waste, as well as forcolliery spoil, during the plan period. Theadopted UDP does, however, incorporate theprinciples underlying the Government andEuropean policies on waste management bythe following priorities: -

*Prevention of waste (minimisation) *maximumrecycling and reuse of material *safe disposalof any waste which cannot be recycled orreused in the following order of priority; waste-to-energy; incineration; landfill (last resort) -commitment to the proximity principle and theneed for regional self-sufficiency requires thatwaste should be disposed of (or otherwisemanaged) close to the point at which it is gen-erated.

The adopted UDP, whilst recognising that land-filling was likely to remain the main method ofwaste management during the plan period, andthat, strictly as a land use plan, the UDP initself has little power to bring about fundamen-tal change, does seek to encourage recyclingand other alternatives to landfill.

Since then, largely as a result of EuropeanDirectives, Government policies on waste havecontinued to develop and there are now targetsfor the reduction of the percentage of wastegoing to landfill and increased recycling (WasteStrategy 2000), together with significantincreases in the landfill tax and the introductionof the Aggregates Levy. The recent EuropeanLandfill Directive is likely to result in an increasein the requirement for new treatment facilitiesand sites specialising in specific wastestreams.

12. Waste

73

11. Minerals

72

Issue M3 – Peat

The large peat bogs of Thorne, Hatfield andGoole Moors are of international importance fornature conservation and have recently beendesignated, in part, as Special Protection Areas(SPA) / Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)under European legislation.

The Borough Council, along with the neigh-bouring authorities of the East Riding ofYorkshire and North Lincolnshire, have formedthe Peatland Partnership Group (PPG) to dealwith planning issues relating to the Europeandesignation of the peat extraction sites ofThorne, Hatfield and Goole Moors. The PPG iscurrently carrying out an "appropriate assess-ment" of the existing planning permissions forpeat extraction granted many years ago, underthe provisions of the Review procedures of theHabitats Regulations 1994, of the effects ofpeat extraction on the conservation value of theMoors. If the "appropriate assessment" findsthat continued peat extraction is having anunacceptable impact on the Moors then suchplanning permissions must be revoked. Therevocation of a planning permission will, however, involve compensation to be paid bythe local authorities to the landowners.

The Government has stated that it will reim-burse local authorities in this situation, but onlyif the local authorities can demonstrate thatthey have followed Government guidance in therevocation procedures; such guidance requiresdetailed negotiations with the landowners overa range of issues, including the possible provision of alternative sites.

This initiative under the Review procedures has,to a certain extent, been somewhat overtakenby the recent announcement of the agreementbetween English Nature and the operators(Scotts) to cease peat extraction immediatelyon Thorne Moor and to cease extraction onHatfield Moor within three years.

Do you think that the Borough Council, aspart of the Peatland Partnership Group,should continue to carry out an "appropriate assessment" of the existingplanning permissions for peat extraction?

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD13 Minerals – Impact of other policies and strategies.

INTRODUCTION

The existing UDP waste policies, the produc-tion of which was commenced in the early1990’s, are based on Government guidancecurrent at the time, and Doncaster’s WasteDisposal Plan, published in 1991. Even at thisdate, however, it was apparent that waste man-agement regimes were in an era of change,both in terms of policy/statutory approachesand technology, and the UDP not only refers tobut also, in certain respects, anticipates andmakes provision for, these changes. TheEnvironmental Protection Act 1990, whichsuperseded the Control of Pollution Act 1974,brought fundamental changes to the wastemanagement regime, in particular to the dis-charge of the household waste disposal func-tion (including the operation of Civic Amenitysites) which, up until then, had largely beencarried out by local authorities. In Doncaster aprivate sector company now carries out thisrole (although the Borough Council, togetherwith Barnsley and Rotherham Councils, have atotal of 20% interest in this company) on arenewable contract basis secured by competi-tive tender. In addition to these changes, the1990’s also saw the setting up of theEnvironment Agency, which took over the wastemanagement licensing functions from localauthorities, and the introduction of the landfilltax.

Strategic Planning Guidance for SouthYorkshire and Doncaster’s approved WasteDisposal Plan both recognise that landfill willremain the main method of disposal fordomestic and commercial waste, as well as forcolliery spoil, during the plan period. Theadopted UDP does, however, incorporate theprinciples underlying the Government andEuropean policies on waste management bythe following priorities: -

*Prevention of waste (minimisation) *maximumrecycling and reuse of material *safe disposalof any waste which cannot be recycled orreused in the following order of priority; waste-to-energy; incineration; landfill (last resort) -commitment to the proximity principle and theneed for regional self-sufficiency requires thatwaste should be disposed of (or otherwisemanaged) close to the point at which it is gen-erated.

The adopted UDP, whilst recognising that land-filling was likely to remain the main method ofwaste management during the plan period, andthat, strictly as a land use plan, the UDP initself has little power to bring about fundamen-tal change, does seek to encourage recyclingand other alternatives to landfill.

Since then, largely as a result of EuropeanDirectives, Government policies on waste havecontinued to develop and there are now targetsfor the reduction of the percentage of wastegoing to landfill and increased recycling (WasteStrategy 2000), together with significantincreases in the landfill tax and the introductionof the Aggregates Levy. The recent EuropeanLandfill Directive is likely to result in an increasein the requirement for new treatment facilitiesand sites specialising in specific wastestreams.

75

12. Waste

74

KEY FACTS

● In 1999/2000 some 800,000 tonnes of "controlled" waste was deposited in landfill sites in Doncaster; this excludes waste streams from mining, quarrying and agriculture

● Household waste accounted for approx. 40% of this 800,000 tonnes; nationally therate is 15%

● The Borough Council can produce a waste strategy to deal with household waste because it has some control through contractual arrangements but commercial and industrial waste is largelyoutside the control of the Council.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Provide an overall planning strategy for waste management throughout the plan period within the regional context and ensure that an adequate planning framework is in place for the provision of facilities by the waste management industry

● Appraise policy options in terms of their social, environmental and economic effects to demonstrate that all practicable options have been assessed against the principles of sustainable development and Best Practical Environment Option (BPEO)

● Have regard to the national waste strategy and the need to maximise, so far as is practicable, regional self-sufficiency.

● Identify sites for waste management and disposal facilities over the plan period, including facilities for the management of waste with specific requirements, such asspecial waste.

Account should also be taken of local municipal waste management strategies.

● Have regard to Waste Strategy 2000 which contains targets for the reduction ofthe percentage of waste going to landfill and increased recycling.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Recognises many of the new principles but adopted before recent significant changes to waste management regimes

● Accepts that landfill will remain the main method of disposal for domestic and commercial waste, as well as for colliery spoil, during the plan period

● Seeks to encourage recycling and other alternatives to landfill.

ISSUE W1 - Waste Management Options

If Doncaster is to achieve the Government’stargets for the reduction of the percentage ofwaste going to landfill, increased recycling andthe pre-treatment of waste going to landfill,then it is likely that additional waste facilitiesthroughout the Borough will be required. Suchfacilities would include sites where waste trans-fer, recycling and treatment operations can becarried out, as well as sites for alternatives tolandfilling such as heat treatment (i.e. combus-tion/incineration), composting etc. The UDPreview will need to identify existing sites withcapacity for the future and assess whether newor replacement waste management facilitiesare needed. Sites suitable for the disposal ofspecial wastes should be identified. Where newor replacement facilities are needed, preferredlocations should be identified.

Where specific locations are not identified,broad areas of search should be indicated, orcriteria against which planning applications forthe development of waste management facili-ties would be considered should be identified.PPG 10 recommends that the identification ofspecific sites is the best way that the planningsystem can make provision for future wastemanagement facilities and if this is not possibleWPAs should justify why this approach has notbeen followed.

Do you think that landfill / land raisingshould continue as the main method ofdisposal of waste within the Borough?

ISSUE W2 - Alternative Methods of WasteManagement

Do you think that methods of waste management alternative to landfill/land raisingsuch as composting and incineration shouldbe encouraged within the Borough?

ISSUE W3 - Location of Waste Facilities

Do you think that specific sites for futurewaste management facilities within theBorough should be identified in the UDP orshould areas of search or a criteria basedapproach be used?

ISSUE W4 - Joint Waste Local Plan

Do you think that the Borough Council shouldconsider joining with neighbouring localauthorities to produce a joint Waste LocalPlan?

ISSUE W5 – Recycling

Do you consider that planning policies canassist in increasing recycling rates?

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD14 Waste – Impact of other policies and strategies.

75

12. Waste

74

KEY FACTS

● In 1999/2000 some 800,000 tonnes of "controlled" waste was deposited in landfill sites in Doncaster; this excludes waste streams from mining, quarrying and agriculture

● Household waste accounted for approx. 40% of this 800,000 tonnes; nationally therate is 15%

● The Borough Council can produce a waste strategy to deal with household waste because it has some control through contractual arrangements but commercial and industrial waste is largelyoutside the control of the Council.

NATIONAL AND REGIONAL PLANNINGPOLICY

● Provide an overall planning strategy for waste management throughout the plan period within the regional context and ensure that an adequate planning framework is in place for the provision of facilities by the waste management industry

● Appraise policy options in terms of their social, environmental and economic effects to demonstrate that all practicable options have been assessed against the principles of sustainable development and Best Practical Environment Option (BPEO)

● Have regard to the national waste strategy and the need to maximise, so far as is practicable, regional self-sufficiency.

● Identify sites for waste management and disposal facilities over the plan period, including facilities for the management of waste with specific requirements, such asspecial waste.

Account should also be taken of local municipal waste management strategies.

● Have regard to Waste Strategy 2000 which contains targets for the reduction ofthe percentage of waste going to landfill and increased recycling.

CURRENT UDP POLICY

● Recognises many of the new principles but adopted before recent significant changes to waste management regimes

● Accepts that landfill will remain the main method of disposal for domestic and commercial waste, as well as for colliery spoil, during the plan period

● Seeks to encourage recycling and other alternatives to landfill.

ISSUE W1 - Waste Management Options

If Doncaster is to achieve the Government’stargets for the reduction of the percentage ofwaste going to landfill, increased recycling andthe pre-treatment of waste going to landfill,then it is likely that additional waste facilitiesthroughout the Borough will be required. Suchfacilities would include sites where waste trans-fer, recycling and treatment operations can becarried out, as well as sites for alternatives tolandfilling such as heat treatment (i.e. combus-tion/incineration), composting etc. The UDPreview will need to identify existing sites withcapacity for the future and assess whether newor replacement waste management facilitiesare needed. Sites suitable for the disposal ofspecial wastes should be identified. Where newor replacement facilities are needed, preferredlocations should be identified.

Where specific locations are not identified,broad areas of search should be indicated, orcriteria against which planning applications forthe development of waste management facili-ties would be considered should be identified.PPG 10 recommends that the identification ofspecific sites is the best way that the planningsystem can make provision for future wastemanagement facilities and if this is not possibleWPAs should justify why this approach has notbeen followed.

Do you think that landfill / land raisingshould continue as the main method ofdisposal of waste within the Borough?

ISSUE W2 - Alternative Methods of WasteManagement

Do you think that methods of waste management alternative to landfill/land raisingsuch as composting and incineration shouldbe encouraged within the Borough?

ISSUE W3 - Location of Waste Facilities

Do you think that specific sites for futurewaste management facilities within theBorough should be identified in the UDP orshould areas of search or a criteria basedapproach be used?

ISSUE W4 - Joint Waste Local Plan

Do you think that the Borough Council shouldconsider joining with neighbouring localauthorities to produce a joint Waste LocalPlan?

ISSUE W5 – Recycling

Do you consider that planning policies canassist in increasing recycling rates?

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD14 Waste – Impact of other policies and strategies.

13. Other Issues

77

13. Other Issues

76

INTRODUCTION

The UDP covers many subject areas, some ofwhich are not as broad in scope as issuessuch as housing, the economy, or transport,but are none the less important. Matters suchas flood risk, telecommunications masts andcommunity facilities often raise issues of greatpublic concern.

ISSUE OTH 1 - Flood Risk

Primary guidance with regard to flood risk is inthe form of Planning Policy Guidance Note 25(PPG25). The existing UDP policies PU8 andPU9 deal with flooding. PU8 states that will notbe permitted in designated washlands here itwould adversely effect the function of the wash-land, and where there was a serious risk to thedevelopment from flood debris or pollution.Washlands are areas of land that accommo-date water during floods and form part of theflood defences. PU9 states that developmentproposals within areas vulnerable to floodingshown on the proposals map will be requiredto comply with special conditions relating tofloor level and layout.

Issues relating to development and flood riskare now prominent as a result of a series ofserious flood events of recent years. The floodsof Autumn 2000 led to the Government takingthe unusual step of producing a second con-sultation draft of PPG25 to enable the issuesthat these floods raised to be taken intoaccount. The final version of PPG25 was pro-duced in July 2001 and contained much morerestrictive and detailed guidance than earlierversion under which the current UDP policieswere written. UDP policies need updating totake into account the latest version of PPG25.

In general development should not take placein areas at risk of flooding or where develop-ment would increase the risk of flooding else-where. PPG25 states that, in functional floodplain, built development should be whollyexceptional and limited to essential transportand utilities infrastructure that has to be there.Such infrastructure should be designed andconstructed so as to remain operational evenat times of flood, to result in no net loss offlood-plain storage, not to impede water flowsand not to increase flood risk elsewhere.

Although PPG25 advises that development inother areas, identified as at risk on the indica-tive flood plain maps, should normally beavoided, it also acknowledges that it mightsometimes be necessary. For example in thoseparts of the country where large areas are atrisk and development is required for the pur-poses of economic regeneration. However,development should only be allowed where asequential test has shown that developmentcannot be accommodated elsewhere.

In order to implement the sequential approachsome form of strategic flood risk assessmentmay well be necessary, carried out by eitherDMBC on its own or in partnership with neigh-bouring authorities or the region.

In addition to this, development will only beallowed in areas at risk of flooding, where ade-quate measures are taken to protect it fromfloods. Any measures taken to protect develop-ment in such areas must not result in unac-ceptable environmental damage or increasethe risk of flooding elsewhere. However someforms of development e.g. residential carehomes or facilities for the emergency servicesare considered unsuitable in areas with even alow level of risk.

The Borough of Doncaster has a large propor-tion of its area, predominantly on the Easternside, shown as being at risk of flooding. Whendeciding whether areas at risk of flooding needto be considered for development, either forhousing or commercial purposes, there aremany other factors to be taken into account.For example, much of the Western half of theborough is Green Belt, where there is a pre-sumption against most forms of development,and the M18 corridor SEZ lies in the Easternsite of the Borough and much of this is identi-fied as being liable to flood risk. Other areasthat are important for the regeneration ofDoncaster e.g. Doncaster Waterfront, are alsoidentified as being at risk of flooding.

In summary PPG 25 allows for development inareas identified as being at risk of flooding pro-vided that the following criteria are met:

● A sequential test has shown that there areno alternative sites available for development

● An appropriate risk assessment has beencarried out

● The type of development is appropriate tothe level of risk

● Appropriate mitigation measures will protect the development without unacceptable harm to the environment

● Neither the development nor any necessary mitigation measures would increase the risk of flooding elsewhere

Provided that the PPG25 criteria set out inthe Issues paper are followed, should development be considered in areasidentified as being subject to flood risk?

ISSUE OTH2 - Telecommunications

Primary guidance with regard to telecommuni-cations development is in the form of PlanningPolicy Guidance Note 8 (PPG8). Policy PU14 ofthe existing UDP deals with telecommunica-tions in summary, this policy allows telecommu-nications development provided that need isjustified and no alternative site can be foundand that it is acceptable in terms of sitingdesign and other considerations. This policydoes not deal with matters relating to healthrisk.

In recent years telecommunications technologyhas become increasingly important both in ourpersonal and working lives. The numbers ofpeople using wireless telecommunicationshave increased vastly, as have the capabilitiesof the technology. This growth has resulted inan increased requirement for infrastructure inthe form masts, antennae and related struc-tures. The demand for the number of masts toincrease comes not only from a requirement forcoverage but also because each mast can onlyhandle a certain number of calls at any onetime. New masts are often required to increasethe capacity of the network in an area withexisting coverage, as well as to extend cover-age to new areas.

Although there is obviously a demand for infra-structure developments many people are oftenconcerned by their impact both visually andincreasingly in terms of their perceived effecton health. Planning policies, therefore, have tobalance the requirement for such developmentwith their effect on visual amenity and addresspeoples concerns over health impacts.

13. Other Issues

77

13. Other Issues

76

INTRODUCTION

The UDP covers many subject areas, some ofwhich are not as broad in scope as issuessuch as housing, the economy, or transport,but are none the less important. Matters suchas flood risk, telecommunications masts andcommunity facilities often raise issues of greatpublic concern.

ISSUE OTH 1 - Flood Risk

Primary guidance with regard to flood risk is inthe form of Planning Policy Guidance Note 25(PPG25). The existing UDP policies PU8 andPU9 deal with flooding. PU8 states that will notbe permitted in designated washlands here itwould adversely effect the function of the wash-land, and where there was a serious risk to thedevelopment from flood debris or pollution.Washlands are areas of land that accommo-date water during floods and form part of theflood defences. PU9 states that developmentproposals within areas vulnerable to floodingshown on the proposals map will be requiredto comply with special conditions relating tofloor level and layout.

Issues relating to development and flood riskare now prominent as a result of a series ofserious flood events of recent years. The floodsof Autumn 2000 led to the Government takingthe unusual step of producing a second con-sultation draft of PPG25 to enable the issuesthat these floods raised to be taken intoaccount. The final version of PPG25 was pro-duced in July 2001 and contained much morerestrictive and detailed guidance than earlierversion under which the current UDP policieswere written. UDP policies need updating totake into account the latest version of PPG25.

In general development should not take placein areas at risk of flooding or where develop-ment would increase the risk of flooding else-where. PPG25 states that, in functional floodplain, built development should be whollyexceptional and limited to essential transportand utilities infrastructure that has to be there.Such infrastructure should be designed andconstructed so as to remain operational evenat times of flood, to result in no net loss offlood-plain storage, not to impede water flowsand not to increase flood risk elsewhere.

Although PPG25 advises that development inother areas, identified as at risk on the indica-tive flood plain maps, should normally beavoided, it also acknowledges that it mightsometimes be necessary. For example in thoseparts of the country where large areas are atrisk and development is required for the pur-poses of economic regeneration. However,development should only be allowed where asequential test has shown that developmentcannot be accommodated elsewhere.

In order to implement the sequential approachsome form of strategic flood risk assessmentmay well be necessary, carried out by eitherDMBC on its own or in partnership with neigh-bouring authorities or the region.

In addition to this, development will only beallowed in areas at risk of flooding, where ade-quate measures are taken to protect it fromfloods. Any measures taken to protect develop-ment in such areas must not result in unac-ceptable environmental damage or increasethe risk of flooding elsewhere. However someforms of development e.g. residential carehomes or facilities for the emergency servicesare considered unsuitable in areas with even alow level of risk.

The Borough of Doncaster has a large propor-tion of its area, predominantly on the Easternside, shown as being at risk of flooding. Whendeciding whether areas at risk of flooding needto be considered for development, either forhousing or commercial purposes, there aremany other factors to be taken into account.For example, much of the Western half of theborough is Green Belt, where there is a pre-sumption against most forms of development,and the M18 corridor SEZ lies in the Easternsite of the Borough and much of this is identi-fied as being liable to flood risk. Other areasthat are important for the regeneration ofDoncaster e.g. Doncaster Waterfront, are alsoidentified as being at risk of flooding.

In summary PPG 25 allows for development inareas identified as being at risk of flooding pro-vided that the following criteria are met:

● A sequential test has shown that there areno alternative sites available for development

● An appropriate risk assessment has beencarried out

● The type of development is appropriate tothe level of risk

● Appropriate mitigation measures will protect the development without unacceptable harm to the environment

● Neither the development nor any necessary mitigation measures would increase the risk of flooding elsewhere

Provided that the PPG25 criteria set out inthe Issues paper are followed, should development be considered in areasidentified as being subject to flood risk?

ISSUE OTH2 - Telecommunications

Primary guidance with regard to telecommuni-cations development is in the form of PlanningPolicy Guidance Note 8 (PPG8). Policy PU14 ofthe existing UDP deals with telecommunica-tions in summary, this policy allows telecommu-nications development provided that need isjustified and no alternative site can be foundand that it is acceptable in terms of sitingdesign and other considerations. This policydoes not deal with matters relating to healthrisk.

In recent years telecommunications technologyhas become increasingly important both in ourpersonal and working lives. The numbers ofpeople using wireless telecommunicationshave increased vastly, as have the capabilitiesof the technology. This growth has resulted inan increased requirement for infrastructure inthe form masts, antennae and related struc-tures. The demand for the number of masts toincrease comes not only from a requirement forcoverage but also because each mast can onlyhandle a certain number of calls at any onetime. New masts are often required to increasethe capacity of the network in an area withexisting coverage, as well as to extend cover-age to new areas.

Although there is obviously a demand for infra-structure developments many people are oftenconcerned by their impact both visually andincreasingly in terms of their perceived effecton health. Planning policies, therefore, have tobalance the requirement for such developmentwith their effect on visual amenity and addresspeoples concerns over health impacts.

13. Other Issues

79

13. Other Issues

78

Government Guidance in the form of PlanningPolicy Guidance Note 8 (PPG8) deals withPlanning and Telecommunications. PPG8emphasises the importance of telecommunica-tions to the economy and to peoples everydaylives. It also requires that the need for anydevelopment is demonstrated and that visualimpact is minimised and all possibilities formast and site sharing are examined. PPG8 alsogives advice regarding health issues relating totelecommunications development.

Health considerations can be a material plan-ning consideration, as can public concern relat-ing to health issues. PPG8 states that It is forthe decision-maker (usually the local planningauthority) to determine what weight to attach tosuch considerations in any particular case. Inrelation to this PPG8 further advises that it isthe Government’s firm view that the planningsystem is not the place for determining healthsafeguards. The Government has commis-sioned research that concluded that a precau-tionary approach be taken, this means thatexposure levels to the electromagnetic fields

generated by telecommunications equipmentare kept at a fraction of the levels that are con-sidered safe. The precautionary approachrequires that development accords with guide-lines set by the International Commission onNon-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

However, it is the Government’s firm view thatthe planning system is not the place for deter-mining health safeguards. It remains centralGovernment’s responsibility to decide whatmeasures are necessary to protect publichealth. In the Government’s view, if a proposedmobile phone base station meets the guide-lines for public exposure, set by ICNIRP, itshould not be necessary for a local planningauthority to consider further the health aspectsand concerns about them. The above guide-lines are enforced through industry guidelinesand health and safety legislation.

Although government advice makes it clear thatindividual local planning authorities are not in aposition to draw there own conclusions regard-ing the safety of telecommunications equip-ment, it is also clear that public concern relat-ing to this issue must be addressed by councilpolicy. Although PPG8 does not allow ‘exclu-sion zones’, it may be appropriate to requirethat mobile phone operators demonstrate thatthey have made every effort to locate masts inthe less sensitive areas, for example areas thataren’t close to residential areas or schools.Applicants should also provide a certificateconfirming that the proposal will comply withICNIRP guidelines.

Should the UDP be more specific regard-ing the types of sites that would be consid-ered more or less acceptable for telecom-munications development and require thatdevelopers demonstrate that they havetried to find sites on more acceptable sitesbefore less acceptable ones?

ISSUE OTH3 - Surplus CommunityFacilities

There is no Planning Policy Guidance Note thatdeals exclusively with community facilities.Chapter 11 of the adopted UDP deals withcommunity facilities including surplus, existingand new facilities.

The current UDP contains a policy (CF4) thatguides the redevelopment of surplus educa-tional or other community facilities. In broadterms the policy requires that a local communi-ty’s needs for facilities are taken into account inany redevelopment decision; in more specificterms it provides the opportunity for formerschool playing fields to be opened up for gen-eral public use and for local community groupsto take over surplus buildings.

There have been instances where this hasworked reasonably well but the maintenance ofsurplus buildings particularly when they areempty is expensive and community groupsoften do not have the necessary resources forrefurbishment and long-term maintenance ofbuildings which were not designed for suchpurposes. Such sites can make ideal brown-field housing opportunities. Often it would bemore practical for surplus buildings to beimmediately and completely cleared and for thesubsequent development to be subject to aplanning obligation to provide a financial contri-bution to an existing or proposed purpose-builtfacility elsewhere. The existing policy recognis-es this but the emphasis is on fully exploringre-use of surplus buildings first which coststime and money and increases uncertainty.Another problem is determining exactly what acommunity’s needs are in relation to thesesorts of redevelopment opportunities.

Most community facilities are provided by theBorough Council but the requirement for a plan-ning obligation would need to apply to all com-munity facilities regardless of ownership.Obligations in respect of open space and afford-able housing are both related to developmentland value (10-15% and 15% respectively) andto specified site criteria and this provides anopen, consistent and fair method of assess-ment; a similar system could be applied herewith 10% of the redevelopment site value beingreinvested in local community facilities. Where asurplus building was in good repair and particularly suited to community needs it couldstill be retained but this would be the exceptionrather than the rule. It is proposed that the policy in respect of surplus school playing fieldsremains unchanged and that normally they beretained for public open space purposes.

13. Other Issues

79

13. Other Issues

78

Government Guidance in the form of PlanningPolicy Guidance Note 8 (PPG8) deals withPlanning and Telecommunications. PPG8emphasises the importance of telecommunica-tions to the economy and to peoples everydaylives. It also requires that the need for anydevelopment is demonstrated and that visualimpact is minimised and all possibilities formast and site sharing are examined. PPG8 alsogives advice regarding health issues relating totelecommunications development.

Health considerations can be a material plan-ning consideration, as can public concern relat-ing to health issues. PPG8 states that It is forthe decision-maker (usually the local planningauthority) to determine what weight to attach tosuch considerations in any particular case. Inrelation to this PPG8 further advises that it isthe Government’s firm view that the planningsystem is not the place for determining healthsafeguards. The Government has commis-sioned research that concluded that a precau-tionary approach be taken, this means thatexposure levels to the electromagnetic fields

generated by telecommunications equipmentare kept at a fraction of the levels that are con-sidered safe. The precautionary approachrequires that development accords with guide-lines set by the International Commission onNon-Ionising Radiation Protection (ICNIRP).

However, it is the Government’s firm view thatthe planning system is not the place for deter-mining health safeguards. It remains centralGovernment’s responsibility to decide whatmeasures are necessary to protect publichealth. In the Government’s view, if a proposedmobile phone base station meets the guide-lines for public exposure, set by ICNIRP, itshould not be necessary for a local planningauthority to consider further the health aspectsand concerns about them. The above guide-lines are enforced through industry guidelinesand health and safety legislation.

Although government advice makes it clear thatindividual local planning authorities are not in aposition to draw there own conclusions regard-ing the safety of telecommunications equip-ment, it is also clear that public concern relat-ing to this issue must be addressed by councilpolicy. Although PPG8 does not allow ‘exclu-sion zones’, it may be appropriate to requirethat mobile phone operators demonstrate thatthey have made every effort to locate masts inthe less sensitive areas, for example areas thataren’t close to residential areas or schools.Applicants should also provide a certificateconfirming that the proposal will comply withICNIRP guidelines.

Should the UDP be more specific regard-ing the types of sites that would be consid-ered more or less acceptable for telecom-munications development and require thatdevelopers demonstrate that they havetried to find sites on more acceptable sitesbefore less acceptable ones?

ISSUE OTH3 - Surplus CommunityFacilities

There is no Planning Policy Guidance Note thatdeals exclusively with community facilities.Chapter 11 of the adopted UDP deals withcommunity facilities including surplus, existingand new facilities.

The current UDP contains a policy (CF4) thatguides the redevelopment of surplus educa-tional or other community facilities. In broadterms the policy requires that a local communi-ty’s needs for facilities are taken into account inany redevelopment decision; in more specificterms it provides the opportunity for formerschool playing fields to be opened up for gen-eral public use and for local community groupsto take over surplus buildings.

There have been instances where this hasworked reasonably well but the maintenance ofsurplus buildings particularly when they areempty is expensive and community groupsoften do not have the necessary resources forrefurbishment and long-term maintenance ofbuildings which were not designed for suchpurposes. Such sites can make ideal brown-field housing opportunities. Often it would bemore practical for surplus buildings to beimmediately and completely cleared and for thesubsequent development to be subject to aplanning obligation to provide a financial contri-bution to an existing or proposed purpose-builtfacility elsewhere. The existing policy recognis-es this but the emphasis is on fully exploringre-use of surplus buildings first which coststime and money and increases uncertainty.Another problem is determining exactly what acommunity’s needs are in relation to thesesorts of redevelopment opportunities.

Most community facilities are provided by theBorough Council but the requirement for a plan-ning obligation would need to apply to all com-munity facilities regardless of ownership.Obligations in respect of open space and afford-able housing are both related to developmentland value (10-15% and 15% respectively) andto specified site criteria and this provides anopen, consistent and fair method of assess-ment; a similar system could be applied herewith 10% of the redevelopment site value beingreinvested in local community facilities. Where asurplus building was in good repair and particularly suited to community needs it couldstill be retained but this would be the exceptionrather than the rule. It is proposed that the policy in respect of surplus school playing fieldsremains unchanged and that normally they beretained for public open space purposes.

13. Other Issues

81

13. Other Issues

80

Do you agree that when education andother community buildings are declaredsurplus, and redevelopment would beappropriate on that part of the site whichwas covered by buildings, a planning obligation should be sought to reinvest aproportion of the site value into local community facilities?

ISSUE OTH4 - Air Quality

The quality of the air we breathe is an importantpart of our quality of life, affecting our environ-ment and health. Air pollution comes frommany sources including industrial processes,domestic heating and even dust from quarryingand agricultural processes. The biggest con-tributor to air pollution in most urban areas,including the urban core of Doncaster, is thatcaused by road traffic.

Many mechanisms are in place to regulate lev-els of air pollution, and planning controls formonly a part of the whole picture. The main areawhere planning can contribute to air qualityrelate to the location of and management oftransport at new development.

National guidance is in the form of PPG23Planning and Pollution Control, this advicemakes it clear that planning control should nottake the place of legislation relating to pollution.However, although legislation exists relating topollution control, pollution can still be a materialconsideration. It may be the case that levels ofpollutants, even where allowed under the legis-lation, may result in planning permission beingrefused, either singly or in conjunction withother material considerations.

The pollution caused on by vehicular trafficrelating to a development either at the site or atother parts of the transport network, can alsobe a material consideration.

Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) has nospecific policy relating to air quality. However,on a long term basis RPG provides the meansof influencing the location of new development,the need for travel and the range of transportchoices. RPG also refers to Air QualityManagement Areas and sets a target of reduc-ing the number of days when air pollution ismoderate or higher.

The system of local air quality managementrequires local authorities to review and assessthe current and likely future quality of air in theirareas and, where appropriate, to designate AirQuality Management Areas (AQMAs) and pro-duce Air Quality Action Plans describing howair quality will be improved in the AQMAs. Localauthorities therefore need to ensure that theland use planning system makes an appropri-ate contribution to the achievement of nationalair quality objectives.

Local authorities should ensure that the landuse planning system makes an appropriatecontribution to the achievement of national airquality objectives. They should also ensure thatair quality considerations are properly consid-ered along with other material considerations inthe planning process, particularly so whereAQMAs have been designated. Furthermore,air quality considerations should also be takeninto account at the development plan stage.

The consideration of air quality issues, alongwith other negative aspects of any develop-ment, have to be weighed against its benefitswhich may be economic social or environmen-tal. Air quality issues need to be given specialconsideration in or near to AQMAs which lielargely within the urban core where we alsoneed to consider issue such as the re-use ofderelict land and wider urban renaissanceaims. We need, therefore, to have a clear ideaof how much weight we should give to air qual-ity issue when making decisions relating toland use planning.

Should development be resisted where it isdemonstrated that a significant reductionin air quality will result or where development would result in the creationof a new Air Quality Action Area?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP policies, relating tothe above issues, including those which:

● Restrict development in washlands.

● Protect existing community facilities, including educational facilities.

● Ensure that the most suitable sites are chosen for telecommunications equipment and that sites are shared whenever possible

● Require environmental assessment, where appropriate, and prevent development that would generate unacceptable levels of pollution.

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies to:

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD15 Mixed Use and Other Issues – Impact ofother policies and strategies.

13. Other Issues

81

13. Other Issues

80

Do you agree that when education andother community buildings are declaredsurplus, and redevelopment would beappropriate on that part of the site whichwas covered by buildings, a planning obligation should be sought to reinvest aproportion of the site value into local community facilities?

ISSUE OTH4 - Air Quality

The quality of the air we breathe is an importantpart of our quality of life, affecting our environ-ment and health. Air pollution comes frommany sources including industrial processes,domestic heating and even dust from quarryingand agricultural processes. The biggest con-tributor to air pollution in most urban areas,including the urban core of Doncaster, is thatcaused by road traffic.

Many mechanisms are in place to regulate lev-els of air pollution, and planning controls formonly a part of the whole picture. The main areawhere planning can contribute to air qualityrelate to the location of and management oftransport at new development.

National guidance is in the form of PPG23Planning and Pollution Control, this advicemakes it clear that planning control should nottake the place of legislation relating to pollution.However, although legislation exists relating topollution control, pollution can still be a materialconsideration. It may be the case that levels ofpollutants, even where allowed under the legis-lation, may result in planning permission beingrefused, either singly or in conjunction withother material considerations.

The pollution caused on by vehicular trafficrelating to a development either at the site or atother parts of the transport network, can alsobe a material consideration.

Regional Planning Guidance (RPG) has nospecific policy relating to air quality. However,on a long term basis RPG provides the meansof influencing the location of new development,the need for travel and the range of transportchoices. RPG also refers to Air QualityManagement Areas and sets a target of reduc-ing the number of days when air pollution ismoderate or higher.

The system of local air quality managementrequires local authorities to review and assessthe current and likely future quality of air in theirareas and, where appropriate, to designate AirQuality Management Areas (AQMAs) and pro-duce Air Quality Action Plans describing howair quality will be improved in the AQMAs. Localauthorities therefore need to ensure that theland use planning system makes an appropri-ate contribution to the achievement of nationalair quality objectives.

Local authorities should ensure that the landuse planning system makes an appropriatecontribution to the achievement of national airquality objectives. They should also ensure thatair quality considerations are properly consid-ered along with other material considerations inthe planning process, particularly so whereAQMAs have been designated. Furthermore,air quality considerations should also be takeninto account at the development plan stage.

The consideration of air quality issues, alongwith other negative aspects of any develop-ment, have to be weighed against its benefitswhich may be economic social or environmen-tal. Air quality issues need to be given specialconsideration in or near to AQMAs which lielargely within the urban core where we alsoneed to consider issue such as the re-use ofderelict land and wider urban renaissanceaims. We need, therefore, to have a clear ideaof how much weight we should give to air qual-ity issue when making decisions relating toland use planning.

Should development be resisted where it isdemonstrated that a significant reductionin air quality will result or where development would result in the creationof a new Air Quality Action Area?

OTHER ISSUES

It is intended that the UDP will carry forwardmany of the current UDP policies, relating tothe above issues, including those which:

● Restrict development in washlands.

● Protect existing community facilities, including educational facilities.

● Ensure that the most suitable sites are chosen for telecommunications equipment and that sites are shared whenever possible

● Require environmental assessment, where appropriate, and prevent development that would generate unacceptable levels of pollution.

In addition to the UDP Review the BoroughCouncil will work through other strategies andmechanisms and alongside other agencies to:

SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS

SD15 Mixed Use and Other Issues – Impact ofother policies and strategies.

15. Consultation Strategy

83

14. Sustainability Appraisal

82

Central Government is keen to ensure that theobjective of sustainable development shapesdecisions at every level of plans and policies.For this reason local authorities are advised tocarry out a sustainability appraisal during thepreparation of a local plan. The Appraisal is aneffective method of ensuring sustainable development principles are ingrained in thepolicy making process.

The purpose of the Sustainability Appraisal is toidentify, evaluate and report on the environmental, economic and social impacts ofthe proposed measures in the DoncasterUnitary Development Plan (UDP), both in termsof costs and benefits. The process is intendedto test the performance of the UDP by exposing the conflicts and likely impacts, andtherefore provide a basis for its improvement.

Appraising the Plan consists of five main tasks.These are:

a) Identification of sustainability objectives and criteria

Once the sustainability objectives/criteria aredefined, a baseline for measuring the UDP policies is created. This then demonstrates ifthe policies have a negative or positive impact.

b) Undertaking a Scoping Exercise

It is necessary that the Plan deals with theappropriate range of sustainability considerations. A checklist of the intendedscope of the Plan can be drawn up by examining statutory guidance and other important documents. This intended scope isthen checked against the actual scope allowingfor any inconsistencies to be highlighted andaltered.

c) Appraisal of Spatial Strategy

This exercise aims to indicate where there arecompatible and incompatible combinations ofpolicies thus proving or disproving if the overallUDP Strategy works.

d) Policy Impact Analysis

This process is at the heart of the sustainabilityappraisal and identifies the impact of each poli-cy option upon each aspect of the sustainabili-ty criteria. The negative, positive or neutralimpact upon the criteria is assessed.

e) Proposals Impact Analysis

A matrix is used to appraise allocated sitesestablishing their suitability for development.

A Scoping Report was undertaken for the current Adopted UDP (1998) and will be usedto inform the review stages. The SustainabilityAppraisal will remain transparent and consistent at all times and be completed along-side the UDP Review and public consultationprocess.

This Communications Strategy sets out thecommunications needs and requirements forthe review of the Unitary Development Plan(UDP). The UDP is the statutory land-use planfor the Borough and should reflect local cir-cumstances. It also has direct linkages to otherCouncil strategies and plans and must complywith central government guidance and regionalplanning guidance. The UDP is a corporatedocument and the Review of it gives us anopportunity to discuss with the public the spatial strategy of the Borough.

Public participation and consultation must bean integral part of the development planprocess allowing the UDP to have public own-ership. Planning Policy Guidance Note 12 –Development Plans (1999) (PPG12) sets outplan-making process including where consulta-tion should be undertaken. However it does notspecify how it should be done. This Strategy isbased around and assists in meeting thestages and requirements set out in PPG12. Insimple terms the plan-making process is as fol-lows:

i. Key Issues – Issues Papers will be producedcovering the major topic areas such as housingand employment. The consultation will focus onlocal communities, businesses, organisationsand individuals relevant to the issues being discussed.

ii. Initial Deposit – A plan is produced whichcontains policies and proposals for theBorough. This is then put out to public consul-tation for six weeks. Also at this stage theEnvironmental Appraisal of the Plan should bepublicised.

iii. Revised Deposit – The changes made fol-lowing the previous objections are incorporatedinto the Revised Deposit. Negotiation alsotakes place in order to reduce the amount ofobjections that were received in the previousDeposit period. The Revised Deposit is thenpublicised for six weeks. Again theSustainability Appraisal is available for consul-tation.

iv. Inquiry – The public and relevant organisa-tions are made aware and informed of thePublic Inquiry.

v. Inspector’s Report – The Inspector’s Reportis made available. The LPA should place itsdecision in respect of each modification in theInspector’s Report on deposit.

vi. Modifications/Adoption – The LPA shouldplace its decision in respect of each modifica-tion in the Inspectors Report on deposit.

Finally the Local Planning Authority should pre-pare a statement which outlines who has beenconsulted, the steps taken to publicise theplan’s proposals and the opportunities given tomake representations.

15. Consultation Strategy

83

14. Sustainability Appraisal

82

Central Government is keen to ensure that theobjective of sustainable development shapesdecisions at every level of plans and policies.For this reason local authorities are advised tocarry out a sustainability appraisal during thepreparation of a local plan. The Appraisal is aneffective method of ensuring sustainable development principles are ingrained in thepolicy making process.

The purpose of the Sustainability Appraisal is toidentify, evaluate and report on the environmental, economic and social impacts ofthe proposed measures in the DoncasterUnitary Development Plan (UDP), both in termsof costs and benefits. The process is intendedto test the performance of the UDP by exposing the conflicts and likely impacts, andtherefore provide a basis for its improvement.

Appraising the Plan consists of five main tasks.These are:

a) Identification of sustainability objectives and criteria

Once the sustainability objectives/criteria aredefined, a baseline for measuring the UDP policies is created. This then demonstrates ifthe policies have a negative or positive impact.

b) Undertaking a Scoping Exercise

It is necessary that the Plan deals with theappropriate range of sustainability considerations. A checklist of the intendedscope of the Plan can be drawn up by examining statutory guidance and other important documents. This intended scope isthen checked against the actual scope allowingfor any inconsistencies to be highlighted andaltered.

c) Appraisal of Spatial Strategy

This exercise aims to indicate where there arecompatible and incompatible combinations ofpolicies thus proving or disproving if the overallUDP Strategy works.

d) Policy Impact Analysis

This process is at the heart of the sustainabilityappraisal and identifies the impact of each poli-cy option upon each aspect of the sustainabili-ty criteria. The negative, positive or neutralimpact upon the criteria is assessed.

e) Proposals Impact Analysis

A matrix is used to appraise allocated sitesestablishing their suitability for development.

A Scoping Report was undertaken for the current Adopted UDP (1998) and will be usedto inform the review stages. The SustainabilityAppraisal will remain transparent and consistent at all times and be completed along-side the UDP Review and public consultationprocess.

This Communications Strategy sets out thecommunications needs and requirements forthe review of the Unitary Development Plan(UDP). The UDP is the statutory land-use planfor the Borough and should reflect local cir-cumstances. It also has direct linkages to otherCouncil strategies and plans and must complywith central government guidance and regionalplanning guidance. The UDP is a corporatedocument and the Review of it gives us anopportunity to discuss with the public the spatial strategy of the Borough.

Public participation and consultation must bean integral part of the development planprocess allowing the UDP to have public own-ership. Planning Policy Guidance Note 12 –Development Plans (1999) (PPG12) sets outplan-making process including where consulta-tion should be undertaken. However it does notspecify how it should be done. This Strategy isbased around and assists in meeting thestages and requirements set out in PPG12. Insimple terms the plan-making process is as fol-lows:

i. Key Issues – Issues Papers will be producedcovering the major topic areas such as housingand employment. The consultation will focus onlocal communities, businesses, organisationsand individuals relevant to the issues being discussed.

ii. Initial Deposit – A plan is produced whichcontains policies and proposals for theBorough. This is then put out to public consul-tation for six weeks. Also at this stage theEnvironmental Appraisal of the Plan should bepublicised.

iii. Revised Deposit – The changes made fol-lowing the previous objections are incorporatedinto the Revised Deposit. Negotiation alsotakes place in order to reduce the amount ofobjections that were received in the previousDeposit period. The Revised Deposit is thenpublicised for six weeks. Again theSustainability Appraisal is available for consul-tation.

iv. Inquiry – The public and relevant organisa-tions are made aware and informed of thePublic Inquiry.

v. Inspector’s Report – The Inspector’s Reportis made available. The LPA should place itsdecision in respect of each modification in theInspector’s Report on deposit.

vi. Modifications/Adoption – The LPA shouldplace its decision in respect of each modifica-tion in the Inspectors Report on deposit.

Finally the Local Planning Authority should pre-pare a statement which outlines who has beenconsulted, the steps taken to publicise theplan’s proposals and the opportunities given tomake representations.

15. Consultation Strategy

85

15. Consultation Strategy

84

What are the objectives of theCommunications Strategy?

The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (asamended by the Planning and CompensationAct 1991) Section 13 (1) states that before thecontent of a UDP can be placed on deposit,the local planning authority should:

a) Give adequate publicity in their area to matters proposed to be included in the Plan;

b) Make persons who may be expected to wish to make representations aware of the opportunity to do so;

c) Give such persons the opportunity to make representations.

The Plan should also have regard to PPG12 aswell as the requirements set out in theDevelopment Plan Regulations.

It is necessary that this CommunicationsStrategy ensures that the UDP preparationprocess is open and accountable and that asmany people as possible are aware of it. Thisallows the public to participate and make rep-resentations and comments including thosesections of the community who lack power,influence and the confidence to take part.Opportunities of better access to informationregarding the Plan should also be created.

Who are the audiences of the UDP Review?

Since the UDP covers the whole DoncasterBorough, the Review process must attracteveryone in the Borough particularly those whoare interested in land use matters. The Reviewshould attract and inform all those people whowork, live or play in the Borough.

Therefore the UDP should involve the followingtypes audience:

● Residents of the Borough● Businesses within the Borough● Statutory consultees/other organisations● Landowners● Developers/consultants – both local and

national● Ward members● Parish Councils● Neighbouring local authorities● Other Doncaster Council Directorates

For the consultation process to work well, it isimportant that each audience has a clearunderstanding of the reason for their involve-ment, how that involvement will take shape andwhat they can expect in return. Contributorsshould also have an opportunity to maintaintheir involvement in the whole process.

The public’s role in the creation of the UDP isvery important and their input is required tomake representations and comments on thePlan’s content both in terms of policies andsite-specific proposals.

Which consultation techniques will be usedand at which stage?

In order for the process to work well the mostappropriate and effective consultation methodsshould be selected. There is a number of audiences and communities and this makeschoosing the correct methods quite a difficult,and perhaps impossible, task.

Rather than one type of consultation methodbeing appropriate, it is considered that a varietyof methods should be used. The CommunityForums and Community Link Workers will beemployed to assist us in deciding the mostappropriate methods for each area.

Hopefully this way we will reach and engage asmany people as possible. This approachshould be undertaken in parallel with methodswhich will remain consistent throughout theplan preparation process.

The Council has a corporate EqualOpportunities Strategy and theCommunications Strategy must to be in accor-dance with it. Everyone should have access towidely broadcast information which is availablein different languages and a variety of methodsshould be used such as the Internet, leafletsand videos. Those people with hearing or sightdifficulties should also be included.

ISSUES STAGE

A leaflet has been produced and will be madeavailable in libraries, council offices and otherlocations across the Borough. It contains a brief summary of the Issuesinvolved in the Review and allows interestedpeople to request the full version of this IssuesPaper. The full version has been sent to statutory consultees and other interestedorganisations. In addition a Summary IssuesReport has also been prepared.

In addition to the leaflet, adverts have beenplaced in the local press highlighting the UDPReview and the publication of the IssuesPapers. They will also be published on theInternet .

If the Community Forums and associatedgroups feel it is appropriate, presentations byStrategic Planning based on the UDP reviewand the Issues Papers will given. Presentationboards will also be displayed in supermarketsand other appropriate venues across theBorough to publicise the Review. TheFrenchgate Centre in Doncaster Town Centre isan example of an important and key venue fora display.

INITIAL DEPOSIT

Again presentation boards will be used as ameans of informing people of the UDP Review– Initial Deposit Stage. It is also considered thatParish Councils, community groups and organi-sations will play a key role in assisting us todecide any other appropriate forms of consul-tation. For example another leaflet may be pro-duced and presentations made to any interest-ed groups. The Internet site should also beupdated together with other adverts.

REVISED DEPOSIT

It is considered that the methods used for theInitial Deposit will also be appropriate for theRevised Deposit stage.

SUMMARY

The Communications Strategy aims to ensurethat the consultation process for the UDPReview attracts a high amount of communityinvolvement and representation. Ultimately theresults of the consultation process shouldinform, provide a context, add quality and legitimacy to the UDP, and empower people toinfluence the outcome of the Plan. Those whotake part in the process should be able tomaintain their involvement as well as see theresults of that involvement/contribution. It ishoped that the process outlined in this paperwill help achieve the above qualities.

15. Consultation Strategy

85

15. Consultation Strategy

84

What are the objectives of theCommunications Strategy?

The Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (asamended by the Planning and CompensationAct 1991) Section 13 (1) states that before thecontent of a UDP can be placed on deposit,the local planning authority should:

a) Give adequate publicity in their area to matters proposed to be included in the Plan;

b) Make persons who may be expected to wish to make representations aware of the opportunity to do so;

c) Give such persons the opportunity to make representations.

The Plan should also have regard to PPG12 aswell as the requirements set out in theDevelopment Plan Regulations.

It is necessary that this CommunicationsStrategy ensures that the UDP preparationprocess is open and accountable and that asmany people as possible are aware of it. Thisallows the public to participate and make rep-resentations and comments including thosesections of the community who lack power,influence and the confidence to take part.Opportunities of better access to informationregarding the Plan should also be created.

Who are the audiences of the UDP Review?

Since the UDP covers the whole DoncasterBorough, the Review process must attracteveryone in the Borough particularly those whoare interested in land use matters. The Reviewshould attract and inform all those people whowork, live or play in the Borough.

Therefore the UDP should involve the followingtypes audience:

● Residents of the Borough● Businesses within the Borough● Statutory consultees/other organisations● Landowners● Developers/consultants – both local and

national● Ward members● Parish Councils● Neighbouring local authorities● Other Doncaster Council Directorates

For the consultation process to work well, it isimportant that each audience has a clearunderstanding of the reason for their involve-ment, how that involvement will take shape andwhat they can expect in return. Contributorsshould also have an opportunity to maintaintheir involvement in the whole process.

The public’s role in the creation of the UDP isvery important and their input is required tomake representations and comments on thePlan’s content both in terms of policies andsite-specific proposals.

Which consultation techniques will be usedand at which stage?

In order for the process to work well the mostappropriate and effective consultation methodsshould be selected. There is a number of audiences and communities and this makeschoosing the correct methods quite a difficult,and perhaps impossible, task.

Rather than one type of consultation methodbeing appropriate, it is considered that a varietyof methods should be used. The CommunityForums and Community Link Workers will beemployed to assist us in deciding the mostappropriate methods for each area.

Hopefully this way we will reach and engage asmany people as possible. This approachshould be undertaken in parallel with methodswhich will remain consistent throughout theplan preparation process.

The Council has a corporate EqualOpportunities Strategy and theCommunications Strategy must to be in accor-dance with it. Everyone should have access towidely broadcast information which is availablein different languages and a variety of methodsshould be used such as the Internet, leafletsand videos. Those people with hearing or sightdifficulties should also be included.

ISSUES STAGE

A leaflet has been produced and will be madeavailable in libraries, council offices and otherlocations across the Borough. It contains a brief summary of the Issuesinvolved in the Review and allows interestedpeople to request the full version of this IssuesPaper. The full version has been sent to statutory consultees and other interestedorganisations. In addition a Summary IssuesReport has also been prepared.

In addition to the leaflet, adverts have beenplaced in the local press highlighting the UDPReview and the publication of the IssuesPapers. They will also be published on theInternet .

If the Community Forums and associatedgroups feel it is appropriate, presentations byStrategic Planning based on the UDP reviewand the Issues Papers will given. Presentationboards will also be displayed in supermarketsand other appropriate venues across theBorough to publicise the Review. TheFrenchgate Centre in Doncaster Town Centre isan example of an important and key venue fora display.

INITIAL DEPOSIT

Again presentation boards will be used as ameans of informing people of the UDP Review– Initial Deposit Stage. It is also considered thatParish Councils, community groups and organi-sations will play a key role in assisting us todecide any other appropriate forms of consul-tation. For example another leaflet may be pro-duced and presentations made to any interest-ed groups. The Internet site should also beupdated together with other adverts.

REVISED DEPOSIT

It is considered that the methods used for theInitial Deposit will also be appropriate for theRevised Deposit stage.

SUMMARY

The Communications Strategy aims to ensurethat the consultation process for the UDPReview attracts a high amount of communityinvolvement and representation. Ultimately theresults of the consultation process shouldinform, provide a context, add quality and legitimacy to the UDP, and empower people toinfluence the outcome of the Plan. Those whotake part in the process should be able tomaintain their involvement as well as see theresults of that involvement/contribution. It ishoped that the process outlined in this paperwill help achieve the above qualities.

Designed by InHouse Graphics (01302) 737916. MM23-623Printed by InPress (01302) 364165

Please send your response to:Doncaster Metropolitan Borough CouncilFREEPOST NEA 196DoncasterDN1 1BR

or phone the UDP Hotline: 01302 735199or email us: udp@doncaster.gov.uk

This information is also available on www.doncaster.gov.uk

cover.qxd 19/02/03 16:28 Page 1