www.doncaster.gov.uk

Doncaster Employment Land Review Development and Planning Doncaster MBC Final Document December 2009

1

Contents 1. Introduction and Purpose of the Study page 2 2. Additional Studies page 4 3. Strategic Policy Context page 6 4. Strategic Site Issues page 18 5. Strategic Transport Capacity page 27 6. Deprivation page 30 7. Demand Assessment page 34 8. Review of the Employment Land Portfolio page 60 Appendices – included within the ELR document A Site Assessment Criteria and Methodology page 70 B Notes of Economic Forecasting Workshop page 82 C Roger Tym Report; key demographic findings page 85 D Knight Frank Report; SWOT analysis page 86 E M18 Modelling page 87 F “Policy On” schemes page 90 G Table of land calculation page 91 H Site Validation Sheet page 92 I Employment Land Review Technical Group page 93 Schedule – published as separate documents on the LDF Website 1 Oxford Economics forecast tables 2 Site Assessment Forms 3 Scoring tables for sites 4 Site validation information Maps & Plans – published as separate documents on the LDF Website 1 Strategic Transport connectivity to potential employment sites 2 2001 Ward maps for Doncaster 3 Site location plan of ELR sites with site reference table by area 4 Sites with greater accessibility resulting from FARRRS Note that an executive summary of the ELR is also separately published and is available on the Local Development Framework evidence base website.

2

1. Introduction and Purpose of the Study 1.1 Context

As part of the Local Development Framework (LDF) process i.e. ensuring there is an up-to-date and transparent evidence base, Central Government encourages each local planning authority to prepare an Employment Land Review (ELR). An ELR will act as an essential part of the evidence base by which local authorities plan for the economic transformation of an area and with which planning applications can be assessed. This will be used to inform the Doncaster Core Strategy and the Allocations Development Plan Document. There are a number of tasks which an ELR must undertake. These are: • analysing the existing employment situation including past trends; • assessing future requirements including translating future growth into floorspace and land

requirements; • identifying a portfolio of employment sites by assessing existing and potential sites. In compiling the ELR consideration has been given to national, regional and local policy and evidence as well as existing and proposed employment sites. The ELR includes a demand assessment for additional land requirements based on the latest employment forecast modelling. This ELR has regard to the Employment Land Reviews: Guidance Note, issued by the ODPM in 2004.

1.2 Consultation undertaken

In preparing this Employment Land Review, consultation took place with various consultees, organisations and individuals and it utilised a number of methods including letters, the internet and workshops. The methods used are listed below: • The Site Assessment methodology was available for public comment as part of the Interim

Planning Position Statement consultation in October to November 2007. This allowed key stakeholders to offer views and opinions on how well the methodology would perform. A number of responses were received and these were taken into account in the final version issued in February 2008. The final version is attached to this ELR (Appendix A).

• Presentations were given to the Property Forum which consists of representatives from the commercial sector. In December 2006 the draft Roger Tym & Partners report – Doncaster Employment Land Study (later referred to as the Roger Tym Report) was presented, and in December 2008 a presentation was given setting out the purpose of the ELR and its initial findings.

• In order to draw up the M18 Corridor Strategic Transport Framework Agreement (see section 5) workshops were held with developers so that the Highways Agency could assess the future capacity of the M18 Corridor.

• In February 2009 an economic forecasts workshop was held with key local and regional stakeholders to consider the job forecasts and their implications. This was led by Oxford Economics (OE) and the notes of that workshop are included as Appendix B.

• The draft Employment Land Review (March 2009) was available for public consultation for a four week period. A number of comments were received and a number of changes were made to the ELR as a result of those responses. The comments made have been recorded with appropriate responses on the Council’s “Uniform” system; a database to manage development plan responses which can be publicly accessed via the Council’s LDF web site.

• A Technical Group, consisting of property professionals, was set up to ensure that the ELR incorporated private sector aspirations and market realities. As well as having discussions about the economy/market in Doncaster and its implications, the ‘Marketability and Deliverability’ scores for the sites were verified.

3

1.3 Changes made to the final Employment Land Review

In response to the replies received, and as a result of changes to guidance, local circumstances and such like, a number of changes have been made to the Employment Land Review. In brief these changes are: • The economic projections were updated due to comments received from consultation, the

2007 ABI survey results and the latest macro economic forecasts taking account of the latest recessional impacts;

• The employment land requirement has been updated to reflect the updated economic forecasts and flexibility factors applied to the calculation of future need based on the take up rate of previous developed land. Also figures were updated on “pipeline projects”. This results in a higher requirement of 200ha for local employment sites and an increase in the amount of office provision of 180,000sq m. The requirement for strategic warehousing sites remains similar at 310ha. (although the plot ratio is now assumed to be 40%). Land around the airport for business use reflects the draft Airport Master Plan.

• Comments received as a result of the Employment Land Review Technical Group; • Rationalisation and update of site notes; • Site scoring adjustment to take account of comments resulting from the consultation; • demand information updated and adjusted to take account of 2009 Employment Land

Availability Survey, updated forecasts, some improvements made to the methodology and assumptions based on updated information;

• Greater cognisance taken of FARRRS and Robin Hood Airport impacts; • Additional supplementary information provided on Inward Investment enquiries.

1.4 Layout of the Employment Land Review

The document seeks to cover the main factors that will affect the future provision of employment land in Doncaster. The ELR sets out the background of two key technical documents (Roger Tym Report and the Oxford Economics Report) and briefly the annual Employment Land Availability Survey. These documents underpin the methodology and economic background. Following this a review of key relevant policy documents is provided including an assessment of the key impacts. Doncaster’s economy is changing and the emerging new sectors are described, around which the future economy will be based. This provides a context for considering how future employment land will be provided. Transport planning, particularly along the strategic highway network, is critical to Doncaster’s new sectors. The transport policy and modelling work is described to assert how transport planning is co-ordinated with employment planning. Employment deprivation is described including its distribution in Doncaster. A section on employment land demand provides an assessment of future need based on economic forecasts, previous land take up and Doncaster’s economic strategy. This includes proposals that will inform the Doncaster Core Strategy policies. It also includes an assessment of travel to work patterns in Doncaster and how much scope there is to locate future job numbers in the Borough. The final section includes assessments of the future supply of employment land including the methodology used to assess sites, information and scoring on 170 existing and potential sites, a key finding on each and summary information. It may be useful to read this Employment Land Review in conjunction with the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which can be found on the LDF website at www.doncaster.gov.uk/ldf. If you have any queries or wish to discuss this document, please contact: Local Development Framework Team, Directorate of Development, Development and Planning, Doncaster Council, Colonnades House, Duke Street, Doncaster. DN1 1ER Email: ldf@doncaster.gov.uk Telephone: 01302 734933

4

2. Additional Studies

There are two additional studies which should be read in conjunction with the Employment Land Review (ELR) and their findings provide a foundation on which the ELR is written:

2.1 Roger Tym and Partners – Employment Land Study (2008)

As part of the preparation on Local Development Framework employment issues, work was commissioned to analyse key employment and workforce issues in the Borough. Roger Tym and Partners (RTP) were appointed to assess the Borough’s policy context, employment issues and sectors and consider how much employment land should be provided whilst assessing the suitability of the present supply. As part of this, economic forecasts were prepared which covered three scenarios; baseline, policy on and a housing led. These were then included in the Core Strategy Further Options consultation undertaken in 2007. The results of their work are summarised in paragraph 3.5.9. Key aspects of their work included: • establishing the forecasting scenarios; • an understanding of the developing logistics sector and the potential to provide for a regional

provision above local historical need; • support for urban centre regeneration and the office market sector; • analysis of commuting flows into and out of the Borough; • an independent assessment of site characteristics by a property specialist; • setting out a methodology for identifying a land quantum demand. Their work provided a foundation for subsequently pursuing more detailed work which included taking forward the employment forecasting scenarios into the Economic Strategy and more recent work undertaken by Oxford Economics. Their work does not represent the Employment Land Review for the following reasons: • the employment forecasts have been separately updated, although they follow the scenarios

set out in the RTP report; • on examining the ODPM guidance and other ELRs, it became apparent that more detailed

site assessments were needed although the information from the RTP work will not be ignored and in particular provides important background information and an independent assessment of sites;

• further consideration was needed to be given to the spatial impacts of the Council’s Economic Strategy;

• the work was not comprehensive as not all sites were covered in sufficient detail.

The Roger Tym Report entitled “Doncaster MBC Employment Land Study” is available on the LDF Website under the Employment Evidence Base page.

2.2 Oxford Economics – Employment Forecasts and Scenario Analysis (Nov

2009)

The Employment Land Review is also underpinned by work commissioned from Oxford Economics (OE). This work was commissioned to provide an up to date relevant assessment of the future Doncaster economy. Such work is consistent with the Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) which notes that the forecasts for job growth potential can be updated by more local forecasts using more recent information. A key driver for this is the transformational nature of the Doncaster economy and the growth in the strategic warehousing sector which asserts large land take-ups. The RSS job potential figures underestimate Doncaster’s strategic warehousing (B8) requirements and this is noted in paragraph 11.5 of the RSS.

5

The initial work by OE was undertaken in the latter part of 2008 and takes into account the ‘credit crunch’ but has not been able to take account of the latest economic position. Indeed, the report notes that the present climate is probably the worst time to undertake any economic forecasting. To assist in the conclusion of the work by OE, a workshop was held with key stakeholders and notes of the workshop are included as Appendix B. Since the draft ELR published in March, the OE report has been updated. In particular it takes account of:

• the latest project information; • the 2007 Annual Business Inquiry Survey; • the latest position on housing targets; • the latest recessional impacts; • comments received from the ELR consultation.

The analysis by OE is used in the Demand Assessment in section 7 of this report. The Oxford Economics report entitled “Employment Forecasts and Scenario Analysis – Update Report Nov 2009” is available on the LDF Website under the Employment Evidence Base page (www.doncaster.gov.uk/ldf).

2.3 Employment Land Availability Survey

The Council monitors its employment land availability with an annual survey that has been undertaken since 2000. The data in these surveys is extensive and has not been repeated in detail in the Employment Land Review. The surveys contain data on available sites, plans and schedules which includes the amount of land taken up for development. As noted elsewhere, Doncaster has, on paper, a large land supply. The surveys, however, do not assess the quality of the land. The Employment Land Review is therefore a welcome opportunity to review the suitability of the employment land supply in the Borough and through the Local Development Framework plan a more sustainable and appropriate employment land supply that meets the needs of modern business sectors, communities and the wider transformational agenda of the South Yorkshire sub-region. The last survey was undertaken in April 2009. The survey found that a total of 352 hectares of land is available broken down into these categories:

Sites with full planning permission 59.4 ha Sites without full planning permission 240.9 ha Reserve employment land 51.9 ha

The surveys are available on the Council’s website under the LDF employment evidence base page.

6

3. Strategic Policy Context 3.1 Introduction

This section sets out the national, regional and local policy context for the provision and review of employment land for Doncaster Borough and the Doncaster Local Development Framework.

3.2 National documents 3.2.1 The UK Economy: Addressing Long-term Strategic Challenges (November 2008)

Since 1997 Central Government has made it a priority to build macroeconomic stability so as to promote a strong economy and create a fair society. The document, published by HM Treasury and Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform, sets out the role that Government needs to play to promote continuing sustainable growth and prosperity for the next decade and beyond. Key factors to achieving these aims are maintaining an attractive business environment and the protection of investment in infrastructure and human capital, in addition to providing value for money. In order to ensure that Government policies work to remove obstacles to growth and help with the UK’s long-term competitiveness, the document also sets out a framework for government engagement with industry sectors. It emphasises that a low carbon economy can create many opportunities for growth including high quality jobs and that the city-regions will play a critical role in the creation of economic growth.

3.2.2 Transforming places: changing lives – a framework for regeneration (2008)

In July 2008 the Department for Communities and Local Government published a consultation document entitled ‘Transforming places: changing lives – a framework for regeneration’, which set out an ambitious package of proposals for shaping the way regeneration is carried out in England. The measures set out in the document aim to: • ensure regeneration investment is co-ordinated and prioritised in the right places with all

organisations working together; • Devolve power so decisions about where to invest are made as locally as possible; • focus regeneration investment on tackling underlying economic challenges. It is recognised that although progress has been made, deprivation is still concentrated in some areas and that to resolve this regeneration investment should be more focussed on tackling barriers to economic growth through reducing rates of worklessness and promoting enterprise. In addition it is important to create sustainable places where people wish to live and work and where businesses want to invest.

One of the key messages to be included in the report is that not all regeneration investment should be in deprived areas. It is considered that developing employment areas/clusters which are accessible to, although not necessarily in, deprived areas are an important element of successful regeneration. Following the consultation, a document called ‘Transforming places changing lives – taking forward the regeneration framework’, was published which sets out how the Government is progressing the issues raised. It sets out the commitments that central government and its key delivery agencies have made to deliver the framework and acknowledges the role that local government plays in regeneration and involving its communities. The role that the private and third sector plays in regeneration is also recognised.

7

3.3 National Guidance 3.3.1 Planning Policy Statement 1 – Delivering Sustainable Development (2005)

PPS1 sets out overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development through the planning system. It recognises the importance of the plan-led system and the key role it plays in delivering sustainable development. PPS1 goes on to state that through their development plans, local planning authorities should seek to: • promote national, regional, sub-regional and local economies by providing a positive planning

framework; • promote urban and rural regeneration to improve the well being of communities; • promote communities which are inclusive, healthy, safe and crime free; • bring forward sufficient land of a suitable quality in appropriate locations to meet expected

needs; • provide improved access for all to jobs and all facilities and services by ensuring everyone

can access them by means other than the car; • focus developments that attract a large number of people in existing centres; • reduce the need to travel and encourage accessible public transport provision; • promote the efficient use of land through higher density, mixed use development and the use

of suitably located brownfield land/buildings; • enhance and protect the natural and urban environment; • address the causes and impacts of climate change and pollution.

3.3.2 Planning Policy Statement 3 – Housing (2006)

PPS3 sets out the Government’s planning policy framework for delivering its housing objectives. The key housing goal is to ensure that everyone has the opportunity of living in a decent home, which they can afford, in a community where they want to live. The guidance requires Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to identify and maintain a rolling five-year supply of deliverable land for housing. The supply should be ‘available’, ‘suitable’ and achievable’ and should consider whether some sites that are currently allocated for industrial or commercial use could be more appropriately re-allocated for housing. This exercise should be undertaken through an Employment Land Review.

3.3.3 Draft Planning Policy Statement 4 – Planning for Sustainable Economic Development

(2007) The initial draft PPS4 establishes the principle for planning policy to support economic growth in line with PPS1. Although planning strategies should be underpinned by a robust evidence base, there is a limit to the extent LPAs can predict the future of their local economies, so a flexible approach to the supply and use of land is important. The planning system should help to ensure increased competition and enterprise, enhanced skills and innovation, increased job opportunities and greater investment in the UK economy. Economic development should be delivered in a way which is sensitive to the challenges of climate change. It is also clear that a wide evidence base should be used to understand both existing business needs and likely changes in the market.

3.3.4 Draft Planning Policy Statement 4: Planning for Prosperous Communities (2009)

In May 2009 the DCLG published a revised draft PPS4, which will replace PPG4, PPG5 and PPS6 and some paragraphs of PPS7 and PPG13 (annex D). The definition of economic development is broad and includes development within the B Use Classes, town centre uses and other development, either urban or rural, which achieves economic objectives. It recognises that many jobs are created in sectors outside the main B use classes and therefore development plans need to be flexible in order to accommodate a greater range of employment opportunities. Importantly the draft continues to focus development within existing centres, supports competition between retailers and aims to conserve the historic heritage. As well as emphasising the importance of the plan making system, the role of the regional bodies is also highlighted.

8

3.3.5 Planning Policy Statement 6 – Planning for Town Centres (2005)

This document provides guidance on retail, leisure, offices and other town centre uses. When selecting sites for development, LPAs should assess the need for new office space and then apply a sequential approach encouraging such uses to locate within centres rather than in out-of-centre locations.

3.3.6 Planning Policy Statement 7 – Sustainable Development in Rural Areas (2004)

This PPS states that LDFs should facilitate and promote sustainable patterns of development and sustainable communities in rural areas. Policies should be included to address the needs of country towns and villages, including planning for strong, diverse economic activity. Local Planning Authorities must be aware of the circumstances, needs and priorities of rural communities and businesses in their area.

3.3.7 Planning Policy Guidance Note 13 – Transport (2001)

The objectives of this guidance are to promote sustainable transport and reduce the need to travel. It encourages development including job creation to locate in the most appropriate service centres so as to offer a realistic choice of access by public transport, walking and cycling. Development plans should allocate or re-allocate sites which are highly accessible by public transport for travel intensive uses (including offices). It also encourages development plans to promote opportunities for freight generating development to be served by rail or waterways.

3.3.8 Planning Policy Statement 25 – Development and Flood Risk (2006)

PPS25 aims to ensure that planning decisions take full account of present and future flood risk as well as the wider implications for development outside flood risk areas. It also sets out a sequential approach for determining the suitability of land for development in flood risk areas.

3.3.9 Employment Land Reviews: Guidance Note (ODPM, 2004) This document was issued by Central Government and provides Local Planning Authorities with guidance to assess the demand and supply of employment land. In particular, the guide helps to assess the suitability of sites, safeguard the best sites from higher land values and help identify those which are no longer suitable for employment development which should be made available for other uses. A three stage process is identified for undertaking employment land reviews: • Stage 1 – taking stock of the existing situation, including an initial assessment of ‘fitness for

purpose’ of existing allocated employment sites; • Stage 2 – creating a picture of future requirements through assessing the scale and nature of

likely demand for employment land and the available supply in quantitative terms; • Stage 3 – identifying a ‘new’ portfolio of sites through a detailed review of site supply and

quality; and identify and designate specific new employment sites in order to create a balanced local employment land portfolio.

3.4 Sub-Regional and Regional documents

3.4.1 The Northern Way and the City Region Development Plan (2005)

The vision of the Northern Way is the “transformation of the North of England to become an area of exceptional opportunity, combining a world-class economy with a superb way of life”1. In order

1 Moving Forward: The Northern Way Business Plan 2005-2008, The Northern Way Steering Group (June 2005)

9

to accelerate the rate of economic growth a number of Investment Priorities have been identified. These are: • bringing more people into employment; • strengthening the region’s knowledge base to drive innovation; • building a more entrepreneurial North; • capturing a larger share of global trade in key clusters; • meeting employers skills needs; • improving connectivity including airports; • creating sustainable communities; • marketing the region to the world.

As part of the Northern Way Initiative, the Sheffield City Region Development Programme (CRDP) has been developed which states that by 2025 the City Region will be “a pivotal international business location, closely connected to the major economic hubs of Leeds, Manchester and the South, recognised as one of the most successful city regions in Europe, sustained through the strengths of its distinctive urban and rural economies”.2

The CRDP contains four elements. These are: 1. capitalising on the City Region’s pivotal position in relation to the economic hubs of Leeds and

Manchester; the south through East Midlands to London; and Hull and the Humber Ports; 2. accelerating sustainable economic growth through a number of key economic drivers; 3. re-establishing the main cities and towns as retail, commercial and business centres; 4. addressing the underlying weaknesses with regard to enterprise, skills, participation,

connectivity and the provision of housing for growth. Within the CRDP, a number of key priorities which are relevant to Doncaster are singled out. Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield is identified as being a key economic driver which can provide a significant amount of jobs. It is recognised that the major urban centres provide key locations for future economic and employment growth. However these are also supported by the M18 Corridor (previously an Objective 1 Strategic Economic Zone) and the Dearne Valley. An emphasis is placed on growth sectors, higher paid and higher skilled employment and quality development as well as the Digital Knowledge Exchange element of Doncaster Education City and the continued process of urban renaissance. To secure dynamic urban centres and thriving market towns, three key priorities for Doncaster are identified: investment based on the renewal of the transport interchange and the refurbishment of the retail facilities; marketing Doncaster as an investment location; and exploring funding streams to unlock Doncaster’s development potential. The development of a vision for the Dearne Valley is also included.

3.4.2 Yorkshire and the Humber Regional Spatial Strategy (May 2008) The Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) for Yorkshire and the Humber forms part of the Doncaster statutory development plan and it sets out the need to transform the economic, environmental and social conditions of the older industrialised parts of the region. The Strategy supports the regeneration of South Yorkshire through its Core and Sub-Regional approach as well as through its employment policies. Through the RSS Doncaster is described as a Sub Regional Town while Thorne and Mexborough are Principal Towns. The Economy section stresses the need to develop a competitive economy with greater diversity, innovation and knowledge. It is recognised that there is a need to provide for excluded communities. Policy E1 recognises the role of airports and sub-regional cities and towns as drivers of the economy and supporting the manufacturing sector which is still significant in the region, while Policy E2 reinforces the urban centric growth and urban transformation strategy by

2 Sheffield City Region Development Programme, A Submission to the Northern Way (September 2006)

10

saying that the centres of Sub-Regional Towns (e.g. Doncaster) should be the focus for office, retail and leisure, while Principal Towns and district centres should be the focus for local services. It is recognised through Policy E3, that existing employment land provision may be located in unsuitable areas and that LDFs should review existing land allocations to resolve this issue through the provision of Employment Land Reviews. The LDF should support making use of appropriately located previously developed land to meet the needs of a modern economy. The South Yorkshire Sub Area policy (SY1) supports the urban renaissance of Doncaster town centre and identifies the Borough as a logistics centre maximising the use of rail and water transport. It also identifies RHADS, Doncaster centre and the Dearne Valley as Regionally Significant Investment Priorities. The RSS provides potential annual job growth from 2006 for each local authority in the region in RSS Tables 11.1 and 11.2. It puts forward an increase of 1550 full time equivalent jobs per annum in Doncaster. Policy E1 states that in order to create a successful and competitive regional economy, plans should deliver economic growth taking account of these figures or more detailed sub-regional or local forecasts as they become available. Objections to these figures were raised by Doncaster Council (at the publication of Further Proposed Changes stage of the RSS) as they did not met Doncaster’s aspirations, recent trends and were contrary to the thrust of the RSS policies. The adopted RSS does recognise in paragraph 11.5 that the annual job figures are indicative and variances may apply where the plans core area approach and sub area policies propose a significant change. As an example of where this applies, the RSS cites the town centre and storage/distribution sectors in Doncaster. The view is taken that both the town centre and storage/distribution figures do not represent the policy position of the RSS and that the numbers of jobs “assigned” to the industry (B1b/c & B2) sector is too high. To illustrate this, the RSS identifies Doncaster as a centre for logistics in the sub area policies but yet it has the lowest potential annual job growth number in South and West Yorkshire apart from rural Calderdale.

The RSS in table 11.3 identifies a potential net change of 110 hectares between 2006 and 2021 for the industrial and storage/distribution sectors based on a high industrial jobs figure and a low estimate for jobs in the storage/distribution sector. Rather than “un-ravel” the assumptions and the figures, Doncaster commissioned a fresh set of economic forecasts from Oxford Economics. This work is referred to elsewhere in this ELR. However, the guidance attached to table 11.3 (in the RSS) on the implication for the future provision of land is still relevant:

“Need to review current allocation on South Yorkshire to accommodate growth while taking account of the continuing restructuring of the Sheffield City Region economy and adjust the spatial pattern of activity. Employment Land Reviews will need to take account of the limited net increase expected in the amount of land used for industry, while reflecting requirements arising from relocation/expansion of existing firms and redevelopment of historic employment sites for alternative uses as part of the transformational agenda.”

Table 11.3 also says that in 2006, there were 360 hectares of allocated land available. The RSS notes that, especially in older industrialised areas, the allocations may not be deliverable and poorly located. It is the purpose of the ELR to assess where a more suitable and deliverable employment land supply might be provided. Doncaster Council undertakes an annual employment land survey which is described in section 3.5.8. RSS Policy E4 stresses the need for land-use plans to provide for specific priority clusters. Relevant to Doncaster are the logistics and the financial and business service sectors. The policy identifies a need for sufficient range, quantity and quality of sites to be identified with links to training, higher education and other infrastructure provision required to support cluster development.

11

3.4.3 Regional Economic Strategy and Yorkshire Forward Corporate Plan 2008/11 The Regional Economic Strategy (RES) has six objectives to take forward the region’s need to position itself in the global economy. The objectives are: • More businesses; • Competitive businesses; • Skilled people; • Connecting people to jobs; • Enhancing transport, infrastructure and the environment; • Creating stronger cities, town and rural communities.

There are a number of actions set out in the RES which are of relevance to Doncaster including boosting key sectors of regional significance such as logistics; encouraging new jobs to locate in places accessible without a car; applying innovative approaches in deprived areas to connect people to opportunity; and improving public transport access to Robin Hood Airport. Regarding the key Physical Development Priorities, the regeneration of Doncaster centre, Education City, the Digital Knowledge Exchange and RHADS are all listed. The Yorkshire Forward Corporate Plan has five Corporate Objectives and these continue the need to link people to good jobs, skills and transport.

3.4.4 South Yorkshire Second Local Transport Plan (2006-2011) The Local Transport Plan (LTP) recognises that in certain locations across the sub-region there are still high levels of deprivation and worklessness which have been exacerbated by limited access to key employment locations. In order to support regeneration across the sub-region a Vision for Transport has been set out and comprises five elements. These are: • Strategic initiatives to support a high growth economy and ensure excellent road, rail and air

links to South Yorkshire; • High quality public transport connections that link the four main urban areas to each other and

RHADS; • High quality car-competitive public transport giving good access to all jobs and services and

feeding into the four main urban centres; • A well maintained and managed road network; • A safe and well maintained transport system.

3.4.5 Regional Freight Strategy (July 2004)

The Regional Freight Strategy (RFS), published by the Yorkshire and Humber Assembly, forms part of the Regional Transport Strategy which fits within the RSS. The policies within it aim to provide a balance between economy, environment and social issues. The RFS supports a number of areas which are of relevance to Doncaster particularly: • promoting water freight through the increased use of inland waterways, through a multi-modal

approach; • safeguarding suitable land and wharves for future development as well as the provision of

road and rail links to facilitate this development; • supporting current and new rail freight terminals where need and commercial support can be

demonstrated; • supporting new and developing direct air freight services such as those at RHADS.

12

3.5 Local Documents 3.5.1 Doncaster Sustainable Borough Strategy (2008)

The Sustainable Borough Strategy (SBS) is the overarching long-term strategy for improving the quality of life in Doncaster and the Local Development Framework will act as the spatial expression of the SBS. The SBS will be refreshed in 2010 and apart from its reference to city of international significance, it is expected that the emphasis on regeneration will continue with an added emphasis on economic engagement. The SBS sets out the long-term vision for the Borough of Doncaster which is:

‘By 2025 Doncaster will be acknowledged as a city of significance in the country and in Europe. This will be based on the recognised advantage of its strategic location, enhanced by its international transport infrastructure. The opportunity for everybody to enjoy the highest quality of life will have enabled Doncaster to attract and retain a growing population with world-class skills in the high growth industries that drive the regional economy.’

There are seven priority themes which provide the balanced framework for achieving the Vision: • Prosperous Place; • Skills & Lifelong Learning; • Healthy & Caring; • Safer, Cleaner & Greener; • Improving Neighbourhoods Together (Cross-cutting); • Equality of Opportunity (Cross-cutting); • Environmental Sustainability (Cross-cutting). Within these themes there are a number of challenges that must be overcome, those which are relevant to Doncaster’s economy are:

Priority Challenge A Prosperous Place 1. Foster Innovation, Enterprise & Economic Diversification

2. Maximise the benefit of Robin Hood Airport to the Borough and the wider economy

3. Foster a Dynamic Urban Core through Town Centre and Borough Wide regeneration

4. Create enterprising and working neighbourhoods 5. Make the most of Doncaster’s Transport Connectivity 6. Deliver a high quality housing offer for Doncaster residents

now and in the future Skills & Lifelong Learning

1. Raise aspirations and transform the skills levels of Doncaster’s working age population

2. Raise aspirations and transform educational achievement Equality of Opportunity (Cross-cutting)

1. Reduce Deprivation according to the ONS values of Multiple Deprivation

Environmental Sustainability (Cross-cutting)

1. Reduce carbon emissions to protect the local & global environment

2. Ensure that Doncaster is fully prepared for the effects of climate change

3. Reducing waste generated and increasing re-use, recycling and composting

3.5.2 Doncaster Economic Strategy (2008)

The Economic Strategy, developed by the Council and its partners, sets out an Intervention Strategy for Doncaster to achieve its vision by 2025. The Strategy seeks to improve the quality of life through:

13

• enhancing Doncaster’s economic growth and opportunities for its residents; • creating a ladder of opportunity to lift the economy to higher levels of productivity; • ensuring benefits spread to all communities especially those where residents are

economically disadvantaged.

The Intervention Strategy consists of nine themes which Doncaster needs to address to increase the prosperity of its population. These are: • Theme 1 – Stimulating technology and innovation and accelerating growth through start-up

and enterprise; • Theme 2 – Promoting a 21st Century skilled and diverse workforce; • Theme 3 – Exploiting Robin Hood Airport’s growth and Doncaster’s exceptional connectivity; • Theme 4 – Repositioning Doncaster – strengthening the offer to inward investors, marketing

and image; • Theme 5 – Fostering a dynamic urban core (town centre regeneration); • Theme 6 – Supporting economic diversification and growth in the following sectors:

Logistics Construction Creative and digital industries Financial and business services Events and the visitor economy;

• Theme 7 – Supporting social regeneration and working neighbourhoods; • Theme 8 – Economic inclusion: tackling worklessness; • Theme 9 – Quality housing offer. There are also three cross cutting themes: to achieve environmental sustainability; provide an exceptional quality of life and prosperous communities; and deliver capacity through partner working. As part of the Economic Strategy additional strategies for logistics and aviation have been produced. These are referred to elsewhere in the ELR.

3.5.3 What does the Economic Strategy mean spatially?

Some of the nine themes listed above can be translated into spatial requirements which need to be considered in the ELR and therefore through the LDF process. With regard to land-use planning, the most effective way to implement the economic strategy is through the provision of good quality sites and buildings located in the most sustainable locations, which are both accessible to the communities of Doncaster and attractive to the market. This means that employment opportunities must be accessible from deprived communities to help support social regeneration and working neighbourhoods. The occupiers of the sites should also be encouraged to provide additional benefits such as training plans to help tackle issues such as worklessness and help to create a skilled and diverse workforce. Creating the right environment for sector growth and diversification can also be assisted through the availability of suitable sites. The ‘most suitable sites’ will depend upon each individual sector, e.g. ‘logistics’ schemes require large sites with good strategic road access, while financial and business services are to be located in main urban areas. Policies which support an urban renaissance and allocate suitable sites for high quality housing are also an integral part of meeting the objectives set out in the Economic Strategy.

3.5.4 How is the Economic Strategy delivered? There are a number of programmes and strategies which support the delivery of the Economic Strategy including the Work, Skills and Enterprise Programme and the Workspace Strategy. The Work, Skills and Enterprise Programme pulls together funding from LEGI (Local Enterprise Growth Initiative), the Working Neighbourhood Fund (WNF) and the Deprived Area Fund (DAF)

14

and is a geographically targeted programme which focuses on those communities with the greatest concentrations of deprivation and worklessness. In conjunction with the Neighbourhood Managers, Neighbourhood Economic and Enterprise Plans (NEEPS) have been produced to address economic barriers in each area. The solutions are tailored to suit individual communities and problems. There are a number of activities which the Work, Skills and Enterprise Programme will deliver and some of these will have an impact upon how, where and which sites are delivered through the Planning System. The four key areas of activity are: • Tailored support to communities • Tailored support to individuals across the Borough • Support for micro and small businesses across the Borough • Strategy support for medium and large business across the Borough.

An integral part of the Work, Skills and Enterprise Programme includes the delivery of Managed Workspace in the Borough. A report3 has been written by MTL which is concerned with the low supply and demand for premises and the need for more start-up space in the town centre and within local communities. As a result of the strategy the Workspace Property Investment Fund has been created which aims to bring existing empty buildings back into use and lets the market determine where the demand is.

3.5.5 Doncaster Unitary Development Plan (1998) The Doncaster Unitary Development Plan (UDP) was adopted in July 1998 and addressed employment provision for the whole Borough through both strategic and development control policies and the allocation of employment land/sites. The relevant chapter is Chapter 4: Economy and Employment and the more significant policies are: EMP1, EMP2 and EMP6. Policies EMP1 and EMP2 allocated new employment sites which generally allowed Use Classes B1 (Business), B2 (General Industrial) and B8 (Storage and Distribution) to be granted. Policy EMP6 protects existing employment sites for B1, B2 and B8 uses. The EMP1 sites were large strategic sites well located next to the motorway network and to the urban structure. These sites provide a reservoir for strategic warehousing and have largely been developed out, probably faster than envisaged when designated. One major shift in policy is that the EMP1 sites provided for a range of uses including B1/2 whereas in fact the majority of the sites have been developed for B8 uses. This has led to some employment analysis concluding that together with the EMP6 sites there is a large supply of B1 and B2 land. The policies in the Employment Chapter have also been saved under the Direction issued by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government and therefore these policies continue to be part of the development plan until the Local Development Framework replaces them.

3.5.6 Doncaster Local Development Framework (on-going) The Local Development Framework (LDF) will gradually replace the Doncaster UDP as the statutory development plan for the Borough. It will comprise a number of individual documents including Doncaster Core Strategy, the Allocations Development Plan Document and various supplementary planning documents. The timescales for producing the LDF are set out in the Local Development Scheme which can be found on the website: www.doncaster.gov.uk/ldf.

3.5.7 Doncaster Interim Planning Position Statements (February 2008)

Due to the planning system being in a transitional phase between the Unitary Development Plan and the emerging Local Development Framework, a suite of Interim Planning Position Statements

3 Strategy to Overcome Workspace Barriers to Business and Entrepreneurial Development, Final Report, MTL (October 2008)

15

(IPPS) have been produced (adopted at Full Council). IPPS2: Employment in Doncaster sets out criteria for two issues: 1) assessing planning applications for strategic employment sites (based on the Assessment Criteria used for this Employment Land Review); and 2) assessing planning applications for mixed use development or alternative uses on allocated employment sites.

3.5.8 Employment Land Availability in Doncaster (undertaken annually) Since 2005 an Employment Land Availability Study has been carried out each year. The survey monitors the availability and distribution of employment land across the Borough. Although the Study is based on allocations in the Adopted UDP, in order to give a more complete assessment of employment land, other significant land that comes forward due to redevelopment or other new opportunities is included. The study includes Use Classes B1 – Business; B2 – General Industry; and B8 – Storage and Distribution; and mixed development (B1/B2/B8).

3.5.9 Roger Tym and Partners Report (December 2008)

As described in Section 2.1, Roger Tym and Partners were commissioned to analyse key employment and workforce issues in the Borough as well as undertake analysis on Doncaster’s demographic and economic profile. The report’s conclusions and findings are set out below while the key demographic points are shown in Appendix C: • the Borough has the potential to attract further national and regional inward investment which

would be over and above the forecast land demand for the strategic warehousing sector; • the amount of employment growth which will and could be realistically accommodated in

Doncaster will depend on the quality of the available labour market as well as the amount of available employment land;

• if the Council pursues a growth strategy in relation to the strategic distribution sector new sites allocated specifically for this use will be required;

• sites suitable for the strategic distribution sector and which are attractive to the market are principally along the M18 corridor;

• although there currently appears to be an over supply of office sites, this is partly due to the relatively small base from which the forecasts grow. However it is considered that there is a need to identify new office locations in the medium term beyond the known potential at RHADS and in the town centre. The take up and supply of sites for offices should be closely monitored so that new sites can be identified in the medium term;

• for Doncaster to provide flexibility and improve competitiveness in the region, it is recommended that:

the ‘poor’ and ‘average/poor’ sites are excluded from the available supply; sufficient employment land is made available in the period 2001 to 2021 to meet the

requirements identified under the mid-point of the enhanced growth and housing-led scenarios;

the Council should safeguard all of the existing sites and allocations that we have classed as ‘very good’ or ‘good’, so as to deter any proposals for alternative non-employment uses and minimise hope values;

the Council takes a pro-active stance in encouraging inward investment projects in the strategic distribution sector, given the competitive location advantage that the Borough enjoys in relation to the motorway network and links to the Humber Ports;

the Council continues to promote office employment opportunities in the town centre and at RHADS, subject to the sequential approach.

3.5.10 Land and Property Study (February 2007)

This report, written by GVA Grimley, was commissioned by Renaissance South Yorkshire to review the geographical distribution of supply and demand of employment land in South Yorkshire; suggest future changes needed in the sub-region’s land and property offer; and analyse the perceived future supply. In order to assess the sites, the methodology used by GVA Grimley was developed in line with the ODPM guidance on ‘Employment Land Reviews’. The report concludes that the perception

16

that South Yorkshire has an identified undeveloped employment land supply which is constrained appears to be true. There is a total of 1,022 hectares of identified, undeveloped land across the sub-region and that only 295 hectares are free from physical constraints and can therefore be considered developable. Within Doncaster there are 76.9 hectares of unconstrained land. However a note of caution should be given to this figure as it includes some sites which are not allocated either through the UDP i.e. they are potential LDF allocations. Using floorspace figures between the years 2004 and 2005, the report shows that a total of 357,815 sq m of B1, B2 and B8 floorspace was developed across South Yorkshire. Over half of that (59.9%) was developed in Doncaster primarily through the provision of B8 warehouses. Regarding the type of site, the general trend is for occupiers to prefer a freehold site rather than accepting a lease from another investor. The report highlights that a lack of freehold land within the sub-region could result in businesses seeking alternative locations for their investment. Although the Land and Property Study undertook land requirement forecasting, the findings will not be discussed here as these have been superseded by more up to date forecasts including “policy on” scenarios. Instead Section 7 of this ELR discusses the modelling/forecasting work undertaken in 2008/9.

3.5.11 Doncaster Access Strategy (2006)

The Doncaster Access Strategy (2006 – 2026) sets out the short, medium and long-term (20 year) vision for transport in Doncaster by aiming to address some distinct drivers for change. These drivers are: • ensuring the provision of an equitable transport system which allows those without private

transport to have good mobility and accessibility; • manage traffic growth without compromising mobility and accessibility and the future

economic aspirations for the Borough; • plan transport from a strategic perspective so as to provide the framework in which

Doncaster’s ambitions can be delivered and realised. In brief the long-term vision will be delivered through the following key strategies and major transport projects: • a new Car Parking Strategy for the town centre; • a new Park and Ride Strategy for the Borough; • the South Yorkshire Rail Strategy; • Bus Strategy; • Local Development Framework; • Regional Freight Strategy; • Major Projects:

A638 QBC Finningley and Rossington Regeneration Route Scheme (FARRRS) A6182 White Rose Way.

The short-term vision will be delivered through a 5 year action plan with three outcomes. These are: 1. Doncaster town centre is an attractive, vital and accessible location; 2. Doncaster has a transport system that provides improved access to existing and new major

developments, particularly for those in most need; 3. Doncaster’s transport system is safe, sustainable and attractive, helping to protect and

enhance local communities and the environment. An important part of the Access Strategy is the creation of a new multi-modal strategic transport model. This enables DMBC to test proposals and carry out strategic transport assessment for all

17

new future development proposals in the Borough. This is particularly important for assessing proposed development schemes along the M18 Corridor and within the Urban Centre.

3.5.12 Logistics Strategy (2009)

Following the preparation of the Economic Strategy, the growth in the logistics sector and the conclusions of the Roger Tym and Partners Report, further work was commissioned to consider how Doncaster can maximise the benefits from this sector and how much should be provided in the future. In April 2008, Atisreal were commissioned to undertake this work and their report is included as part of the LDF evidence base. Relevant key findings to the ELR include: • Doncaster is in an excellent position to plan for logistics growth taking advantage of its multi-

modal transport networks and nearness to the Humber Ports; • there is a practical market preference for the M18 corridor which focuses on suitable

accessible land, access to Humber Ports and access to the motorway network and potentially Robin Hood Airport;

• a need to improve co-ordination of the sector’s activities e.g. operators, training, skill improvement and raising of aspirations;

• prospects to grow the sector towards an advanced logistic economy; • improving transport infrastructure in particular to link up the Borough’s strategic freight

facilities to create an inter-modal facility; • improving branding of the Doncaster logistics sector; • developing partnerships with adjacent areas to improve Yorkshire’s capability; • the market’s preference to focus development on the M18 corridor where topography eases

development, green belt is avoided and there is proximity to the Humber Ports; • The capability of the commercial market to support approximately 500 jobs per year on the

strategic warehousing sector equating to a minimum provision of 230 hectares upto 2026 based on potential market perceptions;

• A need to provide links to the regional Institute of Logistics at Hull to support skill development in the logistics sector;

• A need to improve the perception of the sector to improve career development within the sector.

18

4. Strategic Site Issues 4.1 Introduction

This section highlights the most important and strategic sites within the Borough which need to be examined through the Local Development Framework documents. Each location is viewed as being important for differing reasons and each one presents a variety of planning issues which need to be addressed.

There are eight key sites/areas within the Borough that are addressed in turn: • Urban Centre; • RHADS; • Motorway Corridor and FARRRS • Inland Port; • Dearne Valley; • Bentley Moor Lane, Carcroft; • Power park/DN7 project; • Digital regions project.

4.2 Doncaster Urban Centre

The Study of the Ladder of Accommodation in Doncaster (Spring 2007) written by DTZ, shows that the office market in the Borough is performing quite well, due to land available in out-of-town locations such as Lakeside. These sites offer modern office space which is highly accessible to the motorway network. In addition to this all the elements of the ladder of accommodation are available across the Borough, however much of the stock is inflexible and/or outdated. In particular there is a lack of modern office accommodation in the 93 – 465 sq m (1,000 – 5,000 sq ft) size band (i.e. for larger small companies or small regional HQs). It is considered that the office market could be greatly improved through the up-skilling of the population and the town centre offering accessible, modern accommodation. Office space demand has been constrained by a lack of supply. With an improved office supply in the town centre, Doncaster could play a different role to the other South Yorkshire settlements and be seen as part of the A1 economic corridor linking Edinburgh to London. In order to enhance its appeal, the report suggests that Doncaster Town Centre needs to: • offer high quality modern office accommodation in quality settings with easy access to

transport networks and key amenities; • develop new business incubators and serviced office accommodation to help new business

start-ups in the town; • provide flexible office spaces that will allow companies to grow and expand as and when

necessary; • provide larger scale office accommodation suitable for attracting national and international

businesses to locate their operations in the town centre rather than out-of-town.

In April 2008 Knight Frank produced a South Yorkshire Office Market Report for Renaissance South Yorkshire which undertakes a comprehensive assessment of the towns of Doncaster, Barnsley, Rotherham and the out-of-town office market of Sheffield. As with other related studies an analytical overview for the Boroughs in terms of the current economic profile and employment structure was undertaken. However this is not discussed in detail here as section 7 of the ELR discusses the more recent modelling/forecasting work undertaken in the latter part of 2008 by DMBC.

19

For the purposes of the report, the focus was based on the key office-based Standard Industrial Classification (SIC)4 sub-sectors of Banking & Insurance, Business Services, Other Financial and Business Services as well as Other Services.

The key findings of the report for Doncaster are: • there is a relatively greater proportion of available office space within the town centre

compared with Rotherham and Barnsley; • the town centre has the largest proportion of poorer quality available stock and no new space

is available in the town centre (although this situation has changed with some recent developments) however outside the town centre, 70% of the stock is new build;

• in the short term Doncaster has a healthy amount of new office space in the pipeline – nine new schemes are identified and one is under construction;

• current planning applications are heavily weighted towards out-of-town locations such as major motorway junctions and RHADS;

• there is a successful out-of-town office market; • RHADS has the potential to create a quality out-of-town business park; • the regeneration of Doncaster town centre is the most advanced of the three South Yorkshire

towns; • the future demand of the town centre may be best served by concentrating on improving

modern accommodation to serve indigenous and other established businesses. The report also includes SWOT analyses of the four areas and the one relating to Doncaster is attached at Appendix D of this report.

4.3 Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield/Finningley

Robin Hood Airport was granted planning approval in 2003 and opened in 2005. Beside the aviation facilities the airport includes a range of business land amounting to 120,000 sq m. of floorspace. Since the opening a new access road has been constructed to the airport and planning approval for a rail station has now been granted. Approximately 13,000 sq m of new business floorspace has been constructed, 8,000 sq m of existing floorspace is in use and the hangars are used for training, maintenance and storage uses which amount to 24,000 sq m. A further scheme (Fountains Court) has detailed planning permission for 6,000 sq m.

The planning framework for the airport is the Finningley Airport Planning Brief adopted in 1999. The current airport operation is largely designed around the brief. The future policy for the airport is set generally by the Aviation White Paper (2003) (produced by Central Government) and more specifically by the RSS policies. The Aviation White Paper supports regional airport growth and their role in assisting regeneration by providing a focus for new commercial and industrial development. It suggests public funding support for surface access could be forthcoming in regeneration areas. The RSS supports the operational and related development at Robin Hood Airport and designates it as a Regional Significant Investment Priority. Access to the airport is a category “A” priority in the Regional Transport Priorities. These policies stress the significance of its importance to the sub-region and a focus for surface access development. The Draft Airport Master Plan and the Core Strategy Preferred Options (2005) identified further opportunities for development to the west of the airport (alongside the new airport access road from Hurst Lane) and around areas either side of the southern end of the runway for a freight interchange and business aviation and related maintenance facility. However, some of the land envisaged is proposed by the airport for housing. There is no clear track record for defining how much land should be “allocated” in the LDF around the airport. There has been early progress in developing business areas with approx 13,000m2 of new business development and use of existing buildings amounting to 31,000m2 but take up rates are insufficient to identify trends and there is limited take up of air freight possibilities so far.

4 Standard Industrial Classification of Economic Activities UK SIC (92), Office of National Statistics

20

However there has been substantial progress on training facilities driven by Directions Finningley at Meteor House and the Aviation Academy with support from the public sector. Doncaster Council through its Local Enterprise Growth Initiative is supporting inward investment into the airport based around the airport business opportunities and the locations of Marshalls provides a basis for air related businesses to cluster on the business parks. Therefore the long term prospect for developing business land around the airport is good and will be enhanced by FARRRS. Future designations of land, beyond that already granted consent, need to be brought forward through the LDF process to provide space and longer term certainty for future investment including the FARRRS link to the M18. Future uses of the business areas around the airport will need to be constrained to uses that need to be located at or adjacent to the airport to take account of: • PPG13 annex B requiring activities to be related to the operation of the airport and in scale

with it; • development at the airport needs to be balanced with urban centre regeneration to ensure

office uses are located in accessible locations to support an urban renaissance; • the RSS which has an urban centre core approach for new development; • the Council’s Aviation Strategy supports “reserving” the use of land around the airport for new

aviation sectors, supporting diversification and preventing its loss to business uses that can be located elsewhere.

In October 2008, the airport published its draft airport master plan (AMP) including proposals for the business parks up to the year 2030. The plan envisages the provision of between 6,800 and 8,100 jobs on the business parks depending upon FARRRS being constructed. The AMP also notes that 54% of jobs at the airport are taken up by Doncaster residents.

To support the airport development and its regenerative impact, the Council in 2008 prepared its Aviation Strategy (available on the LDF evidence base page) commissioned from RDG Solutions and DTZ. This included research into the aviation sector considering what could be attracted to Robin Hood Airport and how the Council and its partners could support such inward investment. Key conclusions of that work include: • joint working with other mutually supportive projects in the sub-region; • developing the already well established and innovative training sector; • new opportunities for small jet maintenance and operation; • an estimated “land side” demand for 70,000 sq m of business space by 2016; • scope to develop “end of life” recycling systems linked to training, research and green

technologies; • protecting sites for air-related uses; • development of transhipment facilities; • development of FARRRS is a prerequisite for the airport to maximise its potential.

The following factors will need to be taken in to account when allocating land around the airport: the Council’s Aviation Strategy: • the sub-regional role of the airport – jobs created at the airport will be taken up by residents

outside of the Borough; • the airport is a Significant Regional Investment Facility providing an inward investment

opportunity for the region; • the airport business parks will provide land for airport related businesses within the plan

period; • the draft AMP and its jobs estimate extend beyond the LDF plan period to 2030 and its higher

estimates are based on the implementation of the FARRRS link to the M18; • the airport is one of several key transformational projects in Doncaster and its success is

dependent on market requirements which may vary from current estimates; • as a key economic driver for the Borough, it will be important for a positive supply of land to

be provided to support long term development at the airport;

21

• the full number of airport jobs (up to 2026) is included in the OE modelling but included in different sectors depending on whether they are direct jobs at the airport, located on the adjacent business parks or included in the proposed freight terminal;

• regional and national strategies that support the role of airports as generators of regeneration and economic development;

• FARRRS and its likely positive impact on the future accessibility and demand for employment land on the airport business parks;

• any longer term proposals by Doncaster College for establishing an aviation academy on land adjacent the airport.

Airports act as a catalyst for business services being attracted to a region particularly in growth sectors where air services are used to support business development. Airports can become major transport interchanges and traffic generators, and attract a range of developments. Supply chains can also be stimulated to supply services at the airport and the other businesses located around the airport. The airport is therefore a key part in the future Doncaster and sub-regional economy in order to assist in the diversification and growth of the Doncaster economy. FARRRS will assist in making the air services more accessible, improve the development potential and deliverability of the business parks and reduce travel movement through Doncaster to the airport as well as stimulate further new air services. Together with its rail station and bus services the airport and business areas are well placed to provide a choice of transport mode to a range of users of the airport.

4.4 Motorway Corridors and FARRRS

Doncaster benefits from excellent transport links and is well located on the strategic motorway network in addition to the rail network. Robin Hood Airport also adds to the inter-modality of strategic transport networks. The principal motorway corridors are the A1 running up the western side of the Doncaster and the M18 crossing the A1 and continuing up the east side of the Borough with a branch, the M180, connecting to North Lincolnshire, running south of the River Humber. The existing Unitary Development Plan strategic employment sites have been developed due to the growth of the logistics sector, the available workforce and inward investment. Therefore new sites are required to meet the continuing demand of the logistics sector which needs accessibility to the strategic transport networks including motorways. The sections below summarise the issues relating to the provision of suitable sites in the M18 and A1 corridors. To support the sustainable development of sites, the Highways Agency and Council are working together on modelling the future impacts of potential sites on the motorway network. The ELR sites are being fed into on-going modelling and the conclusions from this will inform the Local Development Framework in particular which sites might come forward.

4.4.1 M18 Corridor

The strategic importance of the M18 motorway corridor was highlighted through the creation of the M18 Objective 1 Strategic Economic Zone (which included Doncaster Urban Centre). In order to inform the preparation of the Integrated Development Plan for South Yorkshire, a report investigating the potential for employment opportunities along the M18 corridor was undertaken by JMP Consultants (2000). It was considered that there was potential to introduce an element of high growth sectors into the corridor together with a programme of training and recruitment initiatives. The report also concluded that due to capacity issues associated with additional traffic created by growth, there is a need to upgrade the M18 particularly around junctions 2 and 3. There is also a requirement to dual the A6182 White Rose Way and implement a network of high quality public transport links between deprived communities and employment opportunities. After the decline of the coal and manufacturing industries in the 1980s and 1990s the Objective 1 programme was designed to secure the restructuring of the economy through sectoral diversification. Three Strategic Economic Zones (SEZs) which covered specific geographical areas were created to address these shortcomings. The M18 Corridor SEZ adopted a market and

22

site based approach to address market failure. It was recognised that the M18 benefits from access to the strategic road, rail and canal network thus giving good access to both national markets and the Humber Ports. For restructuring to take place a portfolio of available fully-serviced sites and speculative premises in appropriate locations was required. However, a shortage of such sites and the extent and speed to which these can be brought forward was affected by the need to upgrade the road infrastructure. With regard to the above “the M18 Corridor SEZ’s long term goal is to become a technological advanced centre for Logistics and Advanced Manufacturing, contributing towards building a balanced, diverse and sustainable high growth economy, recognised as a growing European centre of high technology manufacturing and knowledge based services, and offering opportunities to the whole community.”5 The M18 SEZ also highlighted the longer term investment opportunities in the M18 corridor and a number of schemes have come forward to date which reflect the ability of the market to invest in the corridor. The original UDP allocation for West Moor Park is now developed and an extension to it is currently awaiting Section 106 approval, a link road from junction 5 to Hatfield has been granted planning approval and the Inland Port proposals at Rossington have been submitted as a planning application. In addition to this, the links to the Humber Ports have grown in significance to Doncaster and the corridor’s importance has been further highlighted by the Sheffield City Region Development Plan. A key part of the M18 corridor is the Finningley and Rossington Regeneration Route Scheme (FARRRS). Conceived to support regeneration opportunities at the airport and Rossington, the project will now facilitate the Inland Port development proposals. The FARRRS project is therefore a fundamental part of supporting job creation in the Doncaster and regional economy. Failure to deliver FARRRS would weaken the potential for intermodal freight opportunities in Doncaster serving the economic needs of the region. The further potential for development in the corridor is possible due to non green belt status, access to the urban area, site availability and developing inter-modality opportunities. Capacity of the M18 is an issue with constraints between junctions 2 and 3. The Council is working with potential developers and the Highways Agency to co-ordinate highway investment; relieving constraints and supporting development. Appendix E provides notes on development scenario impacts and an emerging agreement to remove constraints.

4.4.2 A1 Corridor

The A1 Corridor is a strategically important area with major development at Redhouse and South Elmsall (which is in Wakefield). There are links to the Wath Manvers site in Rotherham and also to significantly smaller employment sites in Doncaster at Edlington and Carcroft Common, although such sites do not have direct access to the M18. The A1 corridor is located within the green belt areas of Doncaster where exceptional circumstances are required for development to take place. Topography in the corridor is more undulating adding to development costs and low landscape capacity will weigh against the suitability of sites. The corridor is within the regional regeneration area (defined in the RSS key diagram) and has links to deprived communities but employment sites covered in the ELR either do not link to urban areas or have direct access to the motorway. Transport constraints are less well understood, however there are current speed stresses on some parts of the corridor and long term constraints are considered possible.

4.4.3 Finningley and Rossington Regeneration Route Scheme (FARRRS) The Council, in seeking to regenerate both the Borough and Rossington, brought forward a proposal for a transport route to link the M18 to Robin Hood Airport with links to Rossington. The outcome of looking at several options was to identify a corridor from junction 3 of the M18 to

5 Integrated Development Plan: M18 Corridor, Part A: Strategy, Draft Final Report, Yorkshire Forward (May 2001)

23

Robin Hood Airport. This would have the effect of stimulating much needed regeneration in Doncaster by:

• improving accessibility to and from Rossington for its residents; • upgrading access to the Bankwood Lane and former Rossington Colliery sites bringing

them into more efficient and effective use; • increasing access to air services at Robin Hood Airport from the region and thus

stimulating air service route development; • improving the deliverability of the existing business parks at the airport and opening up

options for other areas to be brought forward for development; • providing access to the proposed Inland Port west of Rossington (see following section).

The route of the scheme and potential sites that are positively affected are shown on Plan 4 . The initial Economic Impact Report showed that the scheme would create 11,000 additional jobs. The report is to be updated with a revision of the business case which is to be re-submitted to the Department of Transport early 2010. The scheme with the co-ordinated improvements to White Rose Way and to the M18 between junctions 2 and 3 will create major new opportunities that will benefit the region and Doncaster by opening up under-used previously developed land and the location of a major rail freight terminal (see para 4.5 below).

4.5 Proposed Strategic Rail Freight Interchange (Inland Port), Rossington

In 2007 proposals were submitted to Doncaster Council for a major rail freight interchange located on land west of Rossington with a link to junction 3 of the M18 and rail links to the East Coast Mainline (ECML). The proposal was considered to be consistent with the emerging regional spatial strategy, freight policy and the continuing need for regeneration in Doncaster. The proposal is one of a series of major interchanges being established around the country and based on the DIRFT model at Daventry. It is also supported by: • representations made to the LDF to provide for a SRFI; • the specific requirement to gauge improvements to Doncaster from Harwich as part of the

coastal ports’ expansion consent; • a need for large sites that can handle 750 metre length trains; • strong private sector involvement backed up by investment in technical studies; • community consultation on the proposals that took place in November 2006 and October

2009; • Linking into and supporting the objectives of FARRRS. The proposal was included in the LDF Core Strategy Further Options Consultation in 2007. The response was largely positive although the actual number of responses was not large. A policy supporting the Inland Port was included in the Core Strategy Consultation Draft (2008) and although the Core Strategy was not approved, the Inland Port policy did not receive adverse comment. The current planning application includes: • a road-rail terminal on 180 hectares of land; • 5.5 million sq m of rail accessible freight warehousing; • rail connections to the ECML and Doncaster – Shirebrook freight line with a road link directly

to junction 3 of the M18; • flood management and landscape mitigation areas of land alongside the site; • an estimate of 5,500 on-site jobs. The project is supported by RSS polices (E1, SY1b3, T4 and supports a category “A” transport priority) and the Regional Freight Strategy (Policy 6.3). More specifically the Strategic Rail Freight Interchange Policy (2004) (published by the Strategic Rail Authority) sets out the criteria for SRFIs (paragraph 7.8) and the need for additional capacity by 2014 (paragraph 6.16). The site is

24

currently designated as green belt therefore exceptional circumstances are required to justify “rolling back” the boundary of the green belt. The site is now subject to a planning application (ref 09/00190/OUTA). The Planning Committee resolved to grant approval on 24 Nov 2009 and has been referred to the Secretary of State with the possibility of a planning inquiry and a planning decision in 2010/11. The planning application included an assessment of alternative sites in the region. This concluded there were no other alternative sites suitable. The assessment has been subject to independent scrutiny on behalf of the Local Planning Authority (by Nathaniel Lichfield and Partners) which found that the assessment was robust and stressed Doncaster was in a unique position on the national rail network. The project is supported by Network Rail and Yorkshire Forward. The site has been included as part of the ELR process, but its eventual inclusion in the LDF may well be “overtaken” by the planning application process.

4.6 Dearne Valley

As with the M18 Corridor, the Dearne Valley area was designated an Objective 1 Strategic Economic Zone. The long-term aim was to see the Dearne Valley recognised as a “knowledge economy location providing both lifestyle and work opportunities for the knowledge worker”6. It was additionally recognised that to successfully restructure the area, it is necessary to secure greater involvement of the community in knowledge-based activities through training, community enterprise and supplier linkages. Priority was also given to continue to upgrade and enhance the environment, improve the quality of life and reverse the image of decline. The Dearne Valley is also mentioned in the Audit Commission report ‘A mine of opportunities’ (November 2008). Also of importance is the emergence of the Dearne Valley Eco-Vision. The vision is a response to the long standing problems resulting from the decline of the coal mining industry on which the Dearne heavily relied. Coupled with other regeneration issues and relatively poor access, the Dearne poses particular challenges that are relevant to the ELR in particular the lack of suitable sites to attract modern industries. However, it should be noted that these problems also apply to other former coalfield communities.

4.7 Bentley Moor Lane

This site is DMBC owned and lies adjacent to Toll Bar and the existing Carcroft Industrial Estate. It is within both the Bentley and Adwick Wards. The site is included in the UDP as a reserve employment site together with a proposal for an A1(M)/A19 link road which aims to improve road access and release land for development. In fact the site has been allocated since the 1970s. Although Doncaster has benefited from a strong distribution market, there has been a limited industrial land take-up in the area. Due to the lack of interest, an independent review of the site was undertaken in 2007 by DTZ to look at market demand, site issues and site feasibility (Carcroft Common – Employment Site Review (2007)). The report states that the site has four issues which need addressing: 1. poor transport links; 2. the need for developer funding to finance the link road; 3. the possible risk of land stability and contamination; 4. the high risk of flooding. The feasibility study shows that although a link road would create a value for the land, if it is to be funded by the developer it would create a huge deficit resulting in the site being unfeasible. For development to take place funding would be required for flood risk measures and the construction of the link road and DMBC would need to accept below market value for the site.

6 Integrated Development Plan: Dearne Valley, Part A: Strategy, Draft Final Report, Yorkshire Forward (May 2001)

25

Although the study demonstrates that the site is unfeasible, there are aspirations for it to be retained through the LDF process to ensure the north and west of the Borough has employment opportunities to compete with the east i.e. the M18 Corridor. If this site is de-allocated it may be important to find other sites in the locality which would attract market interest and therefore create employment opportunities.

4.8 Power Park / DN7 Project Hatfield

The power park proposals are being developed jointly by 3 developers on land at Hatfield Colliery and junction 5 of the M18 and located on approx. 260 ha of land. The project includes: • Re-opened colliery and tipping areas; • Proposed clean burn 900 mega watt power station alongside; • Business park with first phase road infrastructure in place which includes a large proportion of

B8 use covering 30.6ha. Part of this site includes the DEW project; a waste management facility handling significant amount of waste.

• Link Road from Hatfield to junction 5 of the M18 – this is to be developer funded and has been granted planning permission subject to a section106 agreement;

• Business park adjacent junction 5 of the m18 on covering 6.2ha ; • Potential longer term proposal for a logistics park located near junction 5 of the M18 of approx

50 ha; • Approx. 1200 housing and community facilities.

The land uses and employment floorspaces put forward in the Environment Statement have been included in the economic modelling but detailed proposals are still to emerge. The proposal is subject to flood risk issues which are being resolved but may lengthen the delivery and complexity of the project. The project may change and the ELR will need updating in due course to take account of changes. The project will secure significant levels of investment and offers a long term project that will regenerate Stainforth and Hatfield with transport links into the rest of Doncaster. The ELR assumes that the project will be completed by 2026 but this is an optimistic expectation and parts of the project may extend beyond the plan period

4.9 Digital Region Project

In 2009, Doncaster and the other South Yorkshire Councils, Yorkshire Forward and private partners received funding for the “super fast broadband”. This will provide state of the art fibre optic cable infrastructure offering high speed open access with a minimum guaranteed bandwidth of 25mb to the majority of homes and businesses in South Yorkshire. Services from the project will be available from 2010 and enable businesses to benefit form high speed networks. The project is considered to benefits office and research facilities and can be expected to be support inward investment decisions and is expected to stimulate significant job creation in the region. The service will support existing companies by enabling them to develop products and services for the digital age and attract inward investment to the region from those companies leading the way in the new digital economy.

4.10 Summary of key policy and site specific issues

The policy documents and the site specific issues have been taken into account in the preparation of this Employment Land Review and will be used to inform the Local Development Framework Core Strategy and associated documents. The key messages are: • LPAs should encourage and provide attractive business environments where key employment

sites are protected. A good supply of land and buildings should be made available and unsuitable, unsustainable existing sites should be re-allocated for other uses;

• enterprise and competition should be encouraged, together with reduced worklessness;

26

• development should be sustainable; encourage urban regeneration; be located in the most appropriate centres and be available through a choice of public transport;

• the economy should be encouraged to diversify, through capturing key clusters, strengthening

the knowledge base and driving innovation; • the key locations for Doncaster Borough are: Doncaster Urban Centre, M18 Corridor, Robin

Hood Airport, the Dearne Valley, Bentley Moor Lane, Power Park/DN7 Project, the proposed Inland Port at Rossington and the Digital Region Project;

• Doncaster has a demand for offices which is not currently being met; • rural diversification should be encouraged; • freight development should be located so as to maximise use by rail or waterways; • Doncaster has the ability to attract further national and regional inward investment over and

above the forecast demand for strategic warehousing; • councils should re-allocate those sites which are unsuitable for employment use.

27

5. Strategic Transport Capacity 5.1 Introduction

Transport is an important matter for Doncaster’s future economy. The Borough needs to capitalise on the market’s attraction to the strategic transport network, whilst also removing the current constraints on that access to realise growth aspirations. Doncaster Council has been active in working with partners to seek solutions to these constraints. This section provides a short description of emerging high level policies and work currently being undertaken on M18 transport constraints through an emerging strategic framework agreement.

5.2 Key Transport Policies 5.2.1 The Eddington Study - Transport's role in sustaining UK's Productivity and

Competitiveness: The Case for Action Sir Rod Eddington was jointly commissioned by the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Transport to examine the long term links between transport and economic productivity, growth and stability within the Government’s broader commitment to sustainable development. The Study was announced in the 2005 budget and reported on 1 December 2006. The report highlighted the vital role that transport plays in supporting the continued economic success of the UK - setting out clear steps to ensure that investment in infrastructure in the UK rises to the challenges that we face - in five key recommendations to Government. These being: • to meet the changing needs of the UK economy, Government should focus policy and

sustained investment on improving the performance of existing transport networks in those places that are important for the UK’s economic success;

• over the next 20 years, the strategic economic priorities for transport policy should be: congested and growing city catchments; key inter-urban corridors and key international gateways that are showing signs of increasing congestion and unreliability. These are the most heavily used and economically significant parts of the network;

• Government should adopt a sophisticated policy mix to meet both economic and environmental goals. Policy intervention should get congestion pricing on the roads and environmental pricing across all modes correct and make best use of existing networks;

• the policy process needs to be rigorous and systematic: start with the strategic economic priorities, define the problems, consider the full range of modal options using appraisal techniques that include environmental and social costs and benefits, and then ensure that spending is focused on the best policies;

• Government needs to ensure the delivery system is ready to meet future challenges, including the reform of sub-national governance arrangements and the planning process for major transport projects by introducing a new independent Planning Commission to take decisions on projects of strategic importance.

5.2.2 The Stern Review – Economics of Climate Change

The Stern Review was commissioned by the Government and published on 30 October 2006 to assess the nature of the economic challenges of climate change and how they can be met, both in the UK and globally. The Review examined evidence on the economic impacts of climate change itself, and explored the economics of stabilising greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. Furthermore, it considered the policy challenges involved in managing the transition to a low-carbon economy and in ensuring that societies can adapt to the consequences of climate change. The headline conclusions were: • there is still time to avoid the worst impacts of climate change, if strong action is taken now; • climate change could have serious impacts on growth and development; • the costs of stabilising the climate are significant but manageable and that delay would be

dangerous and more costly; • climate change action is required across all countries and it need not stifle the aspirations for

growth of rich or poor countries;

28

• Whilst options exist to cut emissions, strong deliberate policy intervention is required to motivate take up;

• An international response is required to address climate change and a shared understanding of long term goals and agreement on action frameworks is required.

5.2.3 Towards a Sustainable Transport System – Supporting Economic Growth in a Low

Carbon World

In October 2007, Towards a Sustainable Transport System (TaSTS) set out the Government’s approach to strategic transport planning to 2014 and beyond. The document describes how the Government is responding to recommendations from both the Eddington Study and Stern Review of the Economics of Climate Change. Key to this document is a proposed four step process to avoid what Eddington described as “solutions in search of problems”. This being: • clarifying the goals of transport policy; • specifying the challenges to be addressed on each type of network (city and regional; national

and international) as well as a cross network basis; • generating a range of cross modal options to address the challenges ahead looking at the

role of regulation, price and infrastructure; • appraising the options on the basis of their delivery against transport goals and value for

money. TaSTS set out five broad goals of transport. These being: • to support national economic competitiveness and growth, by delivering reliable and efficient

transport networks; • to reduce transport emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, with the

desired outcome of tackling climate change; • to contribute to better safety, security and health and longer life-expectancy by reducing the

risk of death, injury or illness arising from transport and by promoting travel modes that are beneficial to your health;

• to promote greater equality of opportunity for all citizens, with the desired outcome of achieving a fairer society;

• to improve quality of life for transport users and non-transport users, and to promote a healthy natural environment.

5.3 M18 Corridor Strategic Transport Framework Agreement

The M18 has attracted new development over the last 10 years and continues to attract development such that its capacity is likely to be exceeded without mitigation from development schemes. As there are several schemes, the Council is being proactive in modelling their impacts and facilitating joint solutions that will mutually support developments. This began with modelling being carried out by the Council and Highways Agency which looked at a combination of schemes coming forward which was without any prejudice to future planning decisions. The capacity issues are further affected by the impact of FARRRS which links into the M18 at junction 3. In 2006, a “Strategic Framework Agreement” started to be developed with dialogue between DMBC, the Highways Agency (HA) and developers along the M18 corridor in order to prepare an interim planning position to facilitate developments in advance of formal endorsement of the LDF. Transport modelling work undertaken by Faber Maunsell on behalf of DMBC has identified that capacity constraints along the M18 corridor would currently restrict development and regeneration potential. To overcome this, the strategic framework is considered an appropriate mechanism to facilitate developer contributions towards improvements on the M18. This approach included workshops with developers and the HA to assess the future capacity of the M18 and establish guiding principles for developer contributions to improvements. Under this model, developers are required to contribute towards the proportion of trips their developments generate on the M18 over and above normal background growth.

29

The transport modelling work was undertaken to examine the impacts of the known committed developments and proposed future developments in the south of Doncaster on the M18, and provide an informed view as to the level of interventions required to facilitate this growth. This work began in 2006 and has been carried out on a phased approach. Appendix E describes in more detail the modelling work undertaken. This approach demonstrates the capacity of the Council to work with the Highways Agency and developers to deliver mitigation measures and the strategies set out in the Sustainable Borough Strategy and Economic Strategy. This is not without considerable continuing need for negotiation and developer contributions to improvements but the emerging arrangement and dialogue with the developers and the Highways Agency provides a sound basis for finding appropriate solutions. In addition to highway modelling, the planning authorities in conjunction with the Passenger Transport Executive (PTE) is looking to model the impact of housing and employment proposals to identify public transport solutions around transport corridors. The process is known as Land Use Transport Initiative (LUTI) that links the broader economic ambition with the existing and future transport investments. The modelling will support cross boundary co-ordination around possible public transport solutions. The outputs of the LUTI process will be taken into account in the future allocation of employment land in the LDF.

30

6. Deprivation 6.1 The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007

The Index of Multiple Deprivation (IMD 2007) is a relative measure of multiple deprivation at the small area (Lower Super Output Area) level for the whole of England. An LSOA is a low level area unit that has a population of approximately 1,500 people of which there are 193 in Doncaster (from a total of 32,482 nationally). Individual Output Areas and Local Authorities (LA’s) can be compared and ranked. The IMD 2007 is an update of the IMD 2004. The overall Index is compiled from seven sub domains: • Income Deprivation; • Employment Deprivation; • Health Deprivation and Disability; • Education, Skills and Training Deprivation; • Barriers to Housing and Services • Crime • Living Environment Deprivation. Key results In the overall Index for 2007 Doncaster MBC has improved one place to 41 from number 40 in 2004 (from 354 LA’s in England, where 1 is the most deprived). This still leaves Doncaster in the top 20% most deprived LA’s in England. Overall, 38% of Doncaster’s population live in areas rated as being in the top 20% most deprived in England.

Table 1 Comparison of South Yorkshire Local Authorities IMD Ranking. Area IMD 2004 Rank IMD 2007 Rank Change Barnsley 28 43 Improved 15 places Rotherham 63 68 Improved 5 places Sheffield 60 63 Improved 3 places Doncaster 40 41 Improved 1 place

All South Yorkshire authorities show improvement but Doncaster has exchanged places with Barnsley to become the most deprived locally.

6.2 Where are the most deprived areas in Doncaster? The table below shows the top 10 most deprived areas within Doncaster Borough. These overall rankings are based on the 2007 figures where nationally there are 32,482 areas where 1 is the most deprived. Doncaster has several areas among the top 5% most deprived in England. The Balby Bridge/Lower Hexthorpe area is one of only three SOA’s in the Yorkshire and Humber region in the top 100 most deprived in England.

Table 2 Top 10 Most Deprived Areas in Doncaster (IMD 2007 ranking)

Rank Super Output Area (SOA) IMD 2007 Rank 1 Balby Bridge/Lower Hexthorpe 22 2 Denaby Main 134 3 Mexborough Windhill 478 4 Town Centre/Hyde Park (part) 543 5 Stainforth South 665 6 Stainforth West 718 7 Highfields 884 8 Dunscroft 932 9 Hyde Park/Belle Vue 982 10 Christchurch/Lower Wheatley 1143

31

6.3 Employment Deprivation

Employment Deprivation is a sub domain of the overall IMD 2007. The IMD Summary 2007 describes this as: ‘This domain measures employment deprivation conceptualised as involuntary exclusion of the working age population from the labour market’. The data sources that make up the score are: • recipients of Jobseekers Allowance; • recipients of Incapacity Benefit; • recipients of Severe Disablement Allowance; • participants in the New Deal for the 18-24’s not in receipt of JSA; • participants in the New Deal for 25+ not in receipt of JSA; • participants in the New Deal for Lone Parents. Key facts for the Employment Domain of the IMD 2007 in Doncaster • 40% (81,937 people) of Doncaster’s working age population live in areas classified as being

in the top 20% most deprived of the Employment domain. • 23% (46,341) of Doncaster’s working age population live in areas classified as being in the

top 10% most deprived of the Employment domain. • Two areas, Balby Bridge/Lower Hexthorpe and Denaby Main (total working age pop 2,216),

are classified as being in the top 1% most deprived in England of the Employment domain. • The map below shows the distribution of Employment Deprivation. The most deprived areas

are generally located in the north and west of the Borough.

Fig 1: Distribution of Employment Deprivation in Doncaster

32

The most deprived areas in the ‘Employment’ domain in Doncaster The table below shows the top 10 most deprived areas in Doncaster concerning the employment domain. These overall rankings are based on the 2007 figures where nationally there are 32,482 areas where 1 is the most deprived. Table 3 Top 10 Most Deprived Areas in the Employment Domain in Doncaster

Rank Super Output Area (SOA) IMD 2007 Rank

1 Balby Bridge/Lower Hexthorpe 62 2 Denaby Main 129 3 Town Centre 525 4 Stainforth South 602 5 Christchurch/Lower Wheatley 611 6 Dunscroft 874 7 Conisbrough/Denaby East 930 8 Stainforth West 941 9 Wheatley 950 10 Mexborough North 967

6.4 The Unemployment Rate

The unemployment rate in Doncaster currently stands at 5.8% (June 09) with the average monthly figure for 2009 being 5.45%.

Between January 2000 and January 2008 the general trend in the unemployment rate has been downward reaching a decade low of 2.5% in mid 2004. Since 2008 the rate has risen steadily and is now at its highest level for over 10 years. Fig 2 Doncaster Unemployment Rate Between 2000 and 2009.

Unemployment rate 00 - 09

0.00

1.00

2.00

3.00

4.00

5.00

6.00

7.00

Jan00

Dec00

Jan01

Dec01

Jan02

Dec02

Jan03

Dec03

Jan04

Dec04

Jan05

Dec05

Jan06

Dec06

Jan07

Dec07

Jan08

Dec08

Jan09

June09

date

%

Note: The unemployment rate is calculated as the proportion of the resident working age population who are claiming jobseekers allowance at any given time. Data Source – Office for National Statistics by Nomis.

33

Site assessment and employment deprivation The map below shows the distribution of sites to be assessed through this Employment Land Review and their relationship to employment deprivation in Doncaster. Fig 3 Employment Deprivation Areas and ELR Assessment Sites.

6.5 Summary

The findings and statistics set out in this section sets out the high level of deprivation in Doncaster and the need for regeneration and economic development that will improve these areas. These factors will need to be taken into account in both the allocation and retention of suitable employment sites but also in terms of accessibility to those opportunities and the type of training plans/schemes deemed to be most appropriate through the planning application process.

34

7. Demand Assessment 7.1 Introduction

This section of the ELR sets out how much employment land is required over the Local Development Framework Core Strategy period which for employment land purposes is 2008 to 2026. There are three factors which are used to determine an appropriate amount of future employment land in Doncaster Borough: • use of economic forecasts using three scenarios; • looking at the previous take up pattern of employment land; • the Economic Strategy for Doncaster. These three factors need to be considered together to arrive at a suitable requirement. Previously, for exercises of this type, economic development enquiries have been used as a measure of interest. As many enquiries are via web sites however, it is not possible to gain an accurate assessment of demand from this method but they can give an indication of types and size of sectors interested in Doncaster. A short section is included which describes some recent information on inward investment enquiries. A section is also included to lay out the issues associated with the employment sectors in Doncaster; offices, strategic warehousing, local employment sites and Robin Hood Airport. It is important to note that providing land is not the same as providing jobs. The Local Development Framework can provide land and policies for development but that land will need to be developed by the market, sometimes with public sector support. The role of the LDF is to provide a sustainable supply of land, i.e. land that is accessible with environmental impact minimised or mitigated taking account of higher level policies and meeting the needs of future businesses and balancing the supply of jobs to the planned levels of housing provision. To facilitate the investment required, a flexible amount of land is needed which will vary for different employment sectors as their spatial requirements and relevant policy background differ. In this Review, Government guidance has been followed, but as work undertaken in this arena recognises, there is no easy method for determining the appropriate level of employment land. This is particularly so in Doncaster’s case where the following circumstances apply: • the economy is under transformation as traditional industries decline and the servicing and logistics

sector increases; • Doncaster is attractive to new strategic warehousing developments which are significant job providers

and users of land; • there is a strong urban renaissance programme which is seeking to reverse previous trends of office

relocations out of the town centre and maximise the quality and accessibility of the Doncaster urban centre;

• Robin Hood Airport has opened and together with its business parks offers major new job opportunities and assists in inducing and uplifting the outlook of the sub-regional economy but there is no track record of growth to establish its future contribution to job numbers;

• it is not clear what impact important transport schemes such as White Rose Way and FARRRS will have on commercial investment levels;

• there are other regional activities such as the Sheffield City Region Programme as part of the Northern Way, outcomes of the sub-national review and impacts of wider regional and national transport investment within the possible lifetime of the Core Strategy.

In addition, the housing targets set by the RSS are higher than the historical take up pattern in Doncaster. As the housing market and economy are strongly interlinked it is difficult to know how the higher housing numbers will be “played” out – e.g. will higher housing lead to new jobs being attracted or will the housing market “wait” until the economy provides jobs, creates wealth and increases housing demand? In addition, Doncaster is part of the South Yorkshire Housing Growth Bid seeking to provide an uplift of around 22% on the RSS target. Government intentions indicate that the status can be expected to continue throughout the plan period although initially it is funded until 2016. Current housing development rates are well below the RSS target. It is therefore unlikely that, however successful the Growth Point bid

35

is, additional housing above the RSS target will be achieved. Also, it was envisaged that the Eco-Town proposals at Rossington would provide an extra 5,000 dwellings however this has not received Government support in the first phase. The economic modelling update has therefore removed both the Growth Bid and the Eco Town from it’s calculations. The approach taken is to test the employment pipeline “policy on” scenario against the housing targets set out in the RSS. This, whilst not directly aligning the housing and employment targets, sets out to investigate how the planned level of housing provision compares with the potential level of jobs in Doncaster. Without a requisite balance of employment opportunities with housing targets, the following consequences would occur: • a risk of increased levels of out commuting as insufficient jobs would be provided locally; • risk of housing targets not being met as there would be insufficient employment opportunities to

sustain housing demand; • the economic transformation of Doncaster and the wider region would be weakened. The effects of the credit crunch effects are to increase unemployment, reduce substantially the housing completions rate. It is noted however, that whilst Doncaster’s economic position during the downturn may be bleak, the prospect of a swifter recovery is good. In particular there are a range of transformational projects that are being planned in and around Doncaster that are continuing, albeit at their early stages, despite the forthcoming recession. These projects focus on Doncaster’s underlying strengths of accessibility and workforce availability. Significant projects underway are: • Robin Hood Airport and business park where air services have been established and serviced sites

created for business use together with a new access road and continued investment in training facilities;

• continued demand for strategic warehouse and distribution parks at West Moor Park, Armthorpe; Hatfield Power Park; and Bradholme Farm, Thorne;

• continued progress on urban centre projects at various stages of the development process at Doncaster Waterfront, CCQ and St Sepulchre Gate West led by the public sector;

• educational plans to “upgrade” Doncaster’s skill base through the Doncaster College plans and the Council’s “Building Schools For the Future” programme;

• continued progress in the Hatfield Power Park with consent now granted for the 900 mega watt clean burn power station with plans in place for the construction of the Hatfield Link Road to junction 5 of the M18;

• the submission of a planning application for a Strategic Rail Freight Interchange at Rossington representing an investment of approximately £300m;

• commitment from the Highways Agency to improve the M18 around junction 3; • developing business cases for White Rose Way (granted planning consent) and FARRRS with

support from the Regional Transport Board. The continuation of these projects and transport infrastructure provides scope to envisage that Doncaster can still look to the future positively and view that its transformation agenda and the region’s sustainable regeneration policy framework are still a sound basis to continue to plan for growth. Doncaster’s emerging post mining economy is now beginning to take shape around several new sectors which will help achieve Doncaster’s objective to become a more diverse and productive economy. The table below shows the key sectors:

36

Table 4: Change in Key Doncaster Employment Sectors

Sector Growth 2001- 07

% growth

% of total in 2007

Recent Local Spatial Impacts

Long Term Policy Impacts

Financial and business services

4000 31 12 Growth of new office sector at Lakeside.

Town centre projects, new schemes at Power Park and Finningley.

Logistics 5900 61 11 UDP sites in A1 and M18 corridors have been developed out and investment led development at Balby Carr

Continued demand demonstrated by the market for schemes in the M18 corridor.

Air services and airport related businesses and training

1070 N/a 1 Robin Hood Airport opening and 13,000m2 of new development and access road, developing bus services along the QBC to the airport

Continued support for FARRRS, plans for training academy and extension of business areas around the access road.

Manufacturing -2850 -17 10 Although some areas are declining significant areas thrive

Land and access will need to be improved to support manufacturing.

Public services 6540 23 26 New health and educational centres are prevalent in the Borough

Proposals for new health centres and schools will be felt which will result in pressure for development space in and around communities which they serve.

Retail & Leisure

4600 22 19 Frenchgate Interchange and increased retail warehousing over the last 10 years and improving local shopping facilities

Continued town centre regeneration and principal town centres and also growth in warehousing to service internet shopping.

Source: ABI data/OE, jobs at airport from draft Airport Master Plan.

A key factor in the future planning of employment in Doncaster is accessibility to the new emerging sectors. Doncaster’s deprivation pattern is both large and spatially widespread but importantly does not always align to new economic opportunities. This is exacerbated by expectations that jobs should be locally provided, akin to the former mining industry. However, as discussed in section 7.11, the evidence shows that high proportions of workers travel to locations elsewhere in Doncaster and neighbouring areas. There are four responses to address this: • developing high quality public transport networks in Doncaster linking deprived communities with new

economic opportunities. Plan 1 (annexed) shows new and planned public transport routes with potential housing and employment proposals;

37

• travel planning requiring developers to fund advance public transport resources linking new jobs to communities;

• locating new business areas near to deprived communities including situations where there may be constraints that might otherwise restrict development;

• linking new schemes and sectors to training and skills development to support upgrading of skills in the workforce; encouraging local communities to access jobs and ensuring a suitably qualified workforce is available.

7.2 Approach to Assessing Demand - Economic Modelling

The approach to determining a suitable quantum of land using the model scenarios is in four stages:

1. consider the possible economic scenarios to model; 2. run those model with the best information available at the time to arrive at an estimate of the net change of jobs in the future economy; 3. apply assumptions, e.g. job density, to calculate the amount of land needed to accommodate the future jobs; 4. assess the information together with previous take up rates and strategies for the future direction of the Doncaster economy.

Taking account of the above and the approach laid out in the Core Strategy Further Options Consultation, the principle methods for assessing demand will be to use the Economic Forecasting Scenarios measured against market led and public led projects in the Borough together with the positive regeneration and transformation agenda of national, regional and local strategies described in Section 3. These forecasts are considered with the recent take-up trends of employment land and Economic Strategy.

The Roger Tym Report set out a methodology for calculating a suitable land supply ahead to 2026. This was based around using economic modelling to forecast three economic scenarios:

1. Baseline – this maintains the current direction of the economy from previous trends; 2. Enhanced or “Policy On” – this looks to take account of the successful implementation of

economic policies and of planned pipeline projects; 3. Housing led – this forecast takes account of higher levels of housing provision set out in the

Regional Spatial Strategy. Due to the work being commissioned in 2005, the opportunity was taken to use new updated information in conjunction with the Economic Strategy. A fresh set of economic forecasts were commissioned more aligned to the LDF timescales, up-to-date employment data and developing projects in Doncaster. To assist in this process, Oxford Economics (OE) were commissioned to run their regional model using these 3 scenarios. The report builds upon and interacts with work on aviation, logistics, the Airport Master Plan and national economic trends. Their report is available on the LDF evidence base (www.doncaster.gov.uk/ldf). As explained in their report, reliance has not been placed on the potential annual job growth figures in the RSS (table 11.2) – as more recent information is now available and it did not take account of spatial sector policies to locate strategic warehousing around Doncaster resulting in unrealistic job potential numbers for Doncaster. It should also be noted that the OE work updates the forecasts put forward in the Core Strategy Preferred Further Options (CSPFO) consultation of November to January 2008 which was based on the forecasts included in the Roger Tym Report. The OE work used more up to date information and examined more closely the B8 growth sector which the Roger Tym and Partners work only estimated on previous trends, but noted that there was a case for attracting regional demands. Whilst those forecasts in the CSPFO have been updated and aligned to the timescales of the LDF, the scenarios used have remained the same.

Reponses to the forecasts put forward in the CSPFO did not support the baseline case. There was clear support for the housing led and “policy on” scenarios. Comments were supportive of ensuring there were sufficient jobs provided to support housing growth, avoid historic growth patterns which do not take account of new economic sectors, growth aspirations should not be constrained, levels of

38

growth should support modernising the Doncaster economy, growth is needed to enhance the diversity and quality of the economy.

A key part of the work of OE was to include employment forecasts by land use sector as well as the standard industrial classification (SIC) sectors. The land use forecast included the strategic warehouse sector as in order to assist in assessing a suitable supply of strategic sites reserved for large strategic warehousing that has differing site requirements from general B2 sites. In comparison smaller B2 type developments can still be located on urban employment sites. Forecast SIC codes were assigned to land use sectors which are then used to provide the basis to estimate land use quantums. Following the publication of the draft ELR, OE were commissioned to update their forecasts to use in the ELR. Their Update Report (Nov 2009) is published on the LDF website.

7.3 The Three Economic Modelling Scenarios 7.3.1 Baseline Scenario

This position takes account of the most recent trends and developments and reflects Doncaster’s relative industrial competitiveness and population forecasts with no major shift in policy. The key forecast messages are:

• short term slow-down as compared to strong growth over the last 5 years; • a 10,300 job growth between 2008 and 2026; • contraction in construction, retail and financial and business services in the near future; • slowdown in public services although the Government’s policy to “spend its way” out of the slowdown

will impact positively on this; • continued growth in transport and communications; • Doncaster’s longer term outlook is forecast to be stronger than surrounding authorities. The following table shows the results of the baseline forecast. The key point to note is that the forecasts show a much reduced level of growth of 600 jobs per annum and one that will not sustain the level of housing growth as set out in the RSS. Also it should be noted that it does not seek to include market led demand schemes that are coming forward in Doncaster. This leads to the alternative approach to consider what jobs are required to support the housing target. Using this scenario provides the following forecasts:

Table 5: Baseline Employment Forecast by Land Use Category (total jobs)

Baseline 2008 (‘000s)

2026 (‘000s)

2008-2026 Annual Average Change

(‘000s)

2008-2026 Change (000s)

Offices (B1a) 16.2 16.0 0.0 -0.2 Industry (B1b/c, B2) 18.9 14.4 -0.2 -4.5 Storage & distribution (B8) 14.9 16.4 0.1 1.5 o/w Strategic Warehousing 10.4 11.8 0.1 1.4 Retail, leisure and catering 24.7 26.5 0.1 1.8 Health & education 31.9 37.8 0.3 5.9 Other public services 2.0 2.4 0.0 0.4 Other uses (primary/utilities/misc) 22.7 28.1 0.3 5.4 Total 131.2 141.5 0.6 10.3

Source: Oxford Economics Nov 2009.

39

7.3.2 Housing Led Scenario

This approach is top down and seeks to question how many jobs in Doncaster are required to provide employment for the future population if the housing targets and aspirations planned for Doncaster are built. It also assumes that the employment activity rate will converge on the regional average. The scenario takes account of the RSS housing target (1,230 net additional dwellings annually), The scenario forecast notes that Doncaster’s population will grow to approx. 350,000 and will need to maintain the recent high rate of growth since 2000 over the next 20 years in “more challenging economic circumstances” (OE). The conclusion of the forecast is that 41,900 total additional jobs are required between 2008 and 2026. This sets out a considerable economic transformational challenge if Doncaster is to realise the Government’s RSS housing target. The Housing Challenge consultation, published by the Yorkshire and Humber Assembly, proposed higher housing figures. The consultation was part of the review of the RSS but this has now been superceded by the Integrated Regional Strategy. Unlike the ELR draft, the housing led scenario does not include either the Rossington Eco Town or the Growth Point Bid. Both projects have insufficient weight for there to be confidence that they will have a significant difference above the RSS housing target to warrant inclusion in the scenario. It should be noted that this is a change from the position adopted in the draft ELR published in March 2009. Table 6: Housing Led Employment Forecasts by Land Use Category (total jobs)

Housing led 2008 (‘000s)

2026 (‘000s)

2008-2026 Annual Average Change

(‘000s)

2008-2026 Change (000s)

Offices (B1a) 16.1 20.1 0.2 4.0 Industry (B1b/c, B2) 18.7 17.9 0.0 -0.8 Storage & distribution (B8) 15.0 30.5 0.9 15.5 o/w Strategic Warehousing 10.5 25.6 0.8 15.1 Retail, leisure and catering 24.7 28.3 0.2 3.6 Health & education 31.9 39.8 0.4 7.9 Other public services 2.0 2.5 0.0 0.5 Other uses (primary/utilities/misc) 22.9 34.0 0.6 11.1 Total 131.2 173.0 2.3 41.9

Source: Oxford Economics Nov 2009

7.3.3 Policy On Scenario

This scenario seeks to answer the question ‘where might the additional jobs needed come from to support the housing led policy targets?’ and if the current pipeline projects are successful how many jobs would be supported in Doncaster. This includes both direct jobs created by the project but also indirect and induced jobs. These projects have been identified by Doncaster Council with guidance on floorspace and job levels but there is no certainty that the jobs will proceed to the envisaged timetable, however they provide an indication of the levels of investment planned. Appendix F identifies the schemes that inform this scenario. It does not imply consent to these schemes but a recognition of both market demand and investor interest in these sectors and public sector funding in key regeneration schemes. The key areas and development schemes are: • Urban centre – Civic and Cultural Quarter scheme, St Sepulchre Gate West and Doncaster

waterfront proposals. These schemes are mixed use schemes with a significant level of office

40

development and use current knowledge of their likely floorspace. Increased market demand, flexibility in building height and other town centre office opportunities will force or otherwise increase floorspace take-up where required if market demands change. Whilst these are predominantly public led schemes, office studies undertaken have noted Doncaster’s growth in the office sector and whilst the new office property market has performed poorly in the past, the presence of such schemes together with good accessibility links places Doncaster in a strong position to see office sector growth as part of its wider urban renaissance and economic goals.

• M18 Sites – this represents a number of emerging schemes where developers are bringing forward strategic warehouse schemes representing demand. The Logistics Strategy supports the market levels being put forward.

• Inland Port – this is a major scheme servicing the sub-region and region with Strategic Rail Freight facilities.

• Robin Hood Airport and Business Parks – the proposals put forward in the draft Airport Master Plan have been included in this scenario.

• Hatfield Proposal (DN7) – emerging proposals have been included centred around the Hatfield Power Park, M18 link road and developers concept plans.

It should be noted that the above schemes represent developer or public sector plans and over the plan period. There may well be some delay to impede their progress and the inputs into the model present an optimistic position, but it is also true that other unforeseen project may be brought forward within the LDF period. It also assumes that the provision of jobs will not be impeded by the lack of progress of key transport schemes such as White Rose Way widening, M18 improvements and FARRRS. The scenario therefore represents an economic future based on market interest and public commitments and the delivery of transport investment over the medium and longer term. The outputs of these scenarios are shown in the table below: Table 7: Policy On Employment Forecasts by Land Use Category (total jobs) Policy-on 2008

(‘000s) 2026

(‘000s) 2008-2026 Annual Average Change

(‘000s) 2008-2026

Change (000s)

Offices (B1a) 16.3 21.9 0.3 5.6 Industry (B1b/c, B2) 19.0 20.6 0.1 1.6 Storage & distribution (B8) 15.0 30.5 0.9 15.6 o/w Strategic Warehousing 10.5 25.6 0.8 15.1 Retail, leisure and catering 24.7 28.3 0.2 3.6 Health & education 31.9 39.8 0.4 7.9 Other public services 2.0 2.5 0.0 0.5 Other uses (primary/utilities/misc) 23.0 34.9 0.7 12.0

Total 131.9 178.6 2.6 46.7 Source: Oxford Economics Nov 2009

The table shows that using this scenario, there is the potential to provide 46,700 jobs between 2008 and 2026. This is above the “housing led” scenario and provides evidence that Doncaster has the jobs potential within identified planned projects to meet levels of housing sought. The projection identifies that: • Doncaster is well placed with potential economic projects from a variety of sectors to meet the

housing target figure set out in the RSS; • in comparison to the baseline forecast, the challenge to provide both the jobs and housing targets is

quite considerable compared to previous trends; • if Doncaster is to meet the Government’s housing target, then it needs to be able to deliver on the

economic projects emerging which are dependant on transport improvements. A failure to deliver these will impede the delivery of the housing targets as there will be insufficient employment prospects to provide for future Doncaster residents;

41

• there is flexibility such that should some projects fail to progress at the rate envisaged, the RSS housing target can still be supported by the economy (depending on the scale and number of projects that may not progress and whether there are replacement projects as yet unforeseen).

It should be noted that either the housing level sought or the jobs planned may not be provided due to the operation of the commercial market. In terms of actual planning, it does show that the economy, if supported by transport investment, can underpin the housing aspirations set out in the RSS.

7.4 Which scenario should form Doncaster’s job target?

The table and the charts below shows how the 3 scenarios described above compare with each other. Table 8: Summary of Employment Forecasts by Scenarios (Total Jobs)

Scenario 2008

(‘000s) 2026

(‘000s) 2008-2026 Change

(‘000s) 2008-2026 Annual average change

(000s) Baseline

131.2 141.5 10.3 0.6

Housing Led

131.2 173.0 41.9 2.3

Policy On

131.9 178.6 46.7 2.6

Source: Oxford Economics Nov 2009 Fig 4: Doncaster Total Employment Forecasts – Comparison Housing Led Target Scenario, ‘Policy On’ and Baseline Scenarios

100

120

140

160

180

200

1996 2001 2006 2011 2016 2021 2026

Tota

l wor

kpla

ce e

mpl

oym

ent (

job-

base

d, 0

00s)

Policy-neutral baseline

Housing supply-led scenario

Policy on scenario

ForecastLast data outturn

Source: ABI and Oxford Economics Nov 2009 (Fig 5.4) Note: Total jobs and not FTE

The chart shows how the 3 economic scenarios compare with each other up to 2026. The chart clearly shows the potential for growth in the economy deriving from projects coming to Doncaster and planned housing growth. It shows that these potential growth levels will exceed previous growth even in the period

42

2001 and 2006. The “policy on” scenario follows the housing growth scenario but clearly identifies a jobs shortage upto 2016. This partly results from recessional impacts. The “job shortage” may also be less as the housing target rate may well be below the envisaged “housing led” scenario as it uses the 2008 housing trajectory. Current house completion rates are falling below the assumed modelled level. Overall the chart shows a balance in the longer term but overall the economy needs to continue to grow above previous rates. The chart shows the relationship between the three scenarios based on a set of assumptions. In practice, however, markets will influence each other to find a balance i.e. jobs available will support housing growth and available houses will support new jobs. Alternatively, depending on adjacent economies, commuting levels will change to adapt to either too few jobs or dwellings. It should be noted that these are scenarios rather than predictions. The “policy on” scenario is based on market plans and also urban renaissance regeneration policies. Reducing the “policy on” scenario would have the effect of suppressing commercial and public sector regeneration plans.

The baseline scenario models current trends in Doncaster and forecast continued growth but Figure 4 clearly shows it will not meet the housing targets set by the RSS. Using the baseline scenario as a basis for providing future land supply, would put a brake on identified economic projects that are coming forward. Such projects would include town centre offices, growth in the logistics sector, and aviation cluster at the airport all of which support the overall regional growth and reduction in regional disparities. The housing scenario takes into account high rates of house building at 1,230 dwellings per year. This sets a target of what housing levels Doncaster should plan for and the forecast sets out what employment levels will be needed to sustain this based on set assumptions on household size and economic activity levels. Whilst this is a target which spatial planning is seeking to provide, there is evidence of not achieving these targets in the early stages of the plan period: • continued uncertainty on the levels of infrastructure funding as part of the growth bid; • continued uncertainty resulting from the recession; • the housing completion rate in 2008 is below the target and 2009 is expected to be very low. Whilst the level of house building may well pick up later in the plan period, the gap between the “policy on” position and a reduced housing scenario do align comparatively and support the assertion that the housing target is driven by Doncaster’s economic performance. What the “policy on” scenario shows is that Doncaster is in a good position to support higher housing targets with identified projects in place. This is not to say that there are not any challenges: • as pointed out by OE, Doncaster’s growth to achieve this level of jobs would be exceptional and

would need to continue its recent economic performance during even more challenging times; • transport infrastructure is required to support high levels of jobs principally in the M18 corridor; • urban renaissance schemes focussing on a step change in quality office sector growth need to be

brought forward; • skill levels need to be improved in the Borough; • projects still need to be delivered and town centre urban renaissance sites require public sector

interventions. In each of these cases strategies and activities are in place to ensure the momentum of growth, diversification and skills development. It is acknowledged that sites may not come forward for one reason or another. However, the range of projects available is likely to have catalytic effects which will draw in new inward investment in particular the airport, Power Park and town centre office developments. In addition, as noted elsewhere, the decline of manufacturing may be reversed and benefits arising from improved travel connectivity to the town may bring benefits to Doncaster. The policy on position shows there is a higher provision of jobs compared to the housing scenario by nearly 5,000 jobs. Planning around this level supports the level of housing and provides some flexibility should some projects not come forward or planned housing figures increase further. In addition, the level of project also supports the wider regional economy and provides Doncaster with the prospect of reducing its net out commuting. Of the three scenarios, the “policy on” provides the best scenario around

43

which to plan future employment land provision. The figures need to be further compared against previous take up rates and the Economic Strategy.

7.5 Land Use Calculation Deriving from the Economic Model

The table below sets out the methodology adapted from the Roger Tym Report and the assumptions applied to the sectors. The methodology is as follows: • take the forecast jobs numbers for each business sector that has a specific land requirement; • apply a job density to arrive at a floorspace for each sector; • apply a site ratio to determine site size to accommodate the floorspace; • add a frictional factor to allow for churn and relocation in that sector (this is calculated from the

amount of floorspace in that sector using the government’s Valuation Office data); • apply a choice factor to allow for a range of sites for future businesses to meet their particular

requirement of site size, location, tenure and environment plus some sites may not be delivered. Government guidance (PPS1 and PPS4) and the RSS (para 11.15) support a choice factor although some studies do not apply this. In regeneration areas it is considered a reasonable tool to ensure there is a supply of suitable sites to encourage development particularly when flexibility is required, however, a too generous factor will create over provision and unnecessary land take. Where used, a figure of 50% is often used. The Doncaster Economic Strategy in theme 5 supports the need for a wide range of sites to provide for a range of new business opportunities;

• apply a factor for development of “non B” uses which may be permitted on employment sites such as specialist retail uses, leisure uses, utility uses. The table below sets out the assumption used in the sector land quantum calculations:

Table 9: Assumptions Used in Calculating Land Requirement Office B1a Strategic

Warehousing Non strategic warehousing

B1b/c, B2

Job density (m per worker)

18 m2 per worker

88m2 per worker 50 m2 per worker

31 m2 per worker

Site ratio (%) n/a 40 (note that this was 35% in the draft ELR)

40 40

Churn factor (%) 10 Reduced to 5 as future take-up derives from outside the borough

10 10

Choice factor (%) 25 10 reduced as requirements are less variable

50 50

Non employment uses (%)

n/a 0 as other uses unlikely to be permitted on strategic sites

20 20

Using this methodology and assumptions results in the following requirement for the period 2008 and 2026 for the “policy on” scenario set out in table 10.

44

Table 10: Table Showing Land Requirements Based on the “Policy On” Scenario Showing the Total Land Required for Land Use Sectors.

Office Sector (B1a)

Business and industry sector (B1b,c)

Non strategic warehousing (B8)

Strategic warehousing (B8)

Number of net jobs required 2008 to 2026

3,959 -1,204 438 13,814

Floorspace required (m2) to accommodate net change in jobs

71,268 -37,326 21,888 1,215,602

Frictional or "churn" requirement;10% of existing stock, but 5% for strategic B8 (m2)

28,000 122,100 2,726 66,787

Site area needed to accommodate floorspace m2

99,268

211,934 61,535 3,205,973

Hectares 10 21 6 321 Area required to allow for other uses on employment sites (hectares)

5 2 0

Total Hectares 26 8 321

Area requirement for choice factor (hectares)

2 13 4 32

Total site area required 12 ha (124,085 m²)

40 ha 12 ha 353 ha

Note: All figures are subject to rounding A full table with supporting information is included as Appendix G. The table excludes jobs located at the airport. The conclusion of this shows a “policy on” requirement for the following;

• Offices (B1a) – to be based in town centres 124,000 sq m • Local employment sites B1b,c/B2/non strategic B8 52 hectares • Strategic warehousing (B8) 353 hectares

45

7.6 Employment Land take-up 2000 - 2009

Between 2000 and 2009, 294 hectares of land on 110 sites were developed for employment uses and ‘other’ uses on sites allocated for employment uses in the UDP. The following chart shows the amount of land developed for employment use over the period 2000 to 2009. The final ELR has been able to include the results of the 2009 Employment Land Availability Survey.

Fig 5: Employment Land Developed Between 2000-09

Employment Land Development 00-09

0.00

10.00

20.00

30.00

40.00

50.00

60.00

70.00

80.00

90.00

2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Site area dev (ha)

Build area (ha)

Note: 2007 can be considered an exceptional year due to the completion of several large B8 warehouse developments in that year. Source: Employment Land Availability Surveys The table identifies how much land has been developed for employment purposes and provides a basis for estimating what future land requirement might be. These levels of employment land developed can provide guidance on the future requirement. The following table (table 11) breaks down the information into sectors and extrapolates that out over the LDF period. The table includes “choice factor” and the “churn factors” which were not included in the draft ELR. They are now used in order to calculate future land requirement consistently. These factors are relevant because the take-up rates represent land actually developed whereas additional land is always required so choice and flexibility is available. The table provides the information by land use sectors. The B8 sector is split into strategic or large site and smaller B8 or non strategic uses. It also identifies mixed employment uses where no one “use class” dominates. The table also includes land developed for other uses. Future provision needs to take this into account where there is the possibility of other permitted uses. The land developed for B2, B8 (non strategic), mixed employment uses and other uses is aggregated to identify how much land might be needed for local employment sites.

46

Table 11: Table of Employment Land Development Between 2000-2009.

Year No of Sites

Total Site Area (ha) B1 B2

B8 (Strategic)

B8 (Non Strategic)

Mixed Emp. Uses

Other uses: No of sites

Other uses:

Ha 2000 13 28.35 0.90 0.46 26.66 0.33 0.00 0 0.00 2001 12 15.19 1.15 9.12 0.00 4.70 0.00 1 0.22 2002 9 19.83 8.35 1.89 8.12 0.00 1.47 0 0.00 2003 12 31.56 1.74 4.02 21.08 0.00 0.00 1 4.72 2004 3 26.67 0.00 3.02 23.65 0.00 0.00 0 0.00 2005 10 20.74 0.30 8.47 5.77 0.20 0.00 3 6.00 2006 16 46.70 3.97 9.79 18.90 0.00 0.00 5 14.04 2007 21 83.83 4.08 5.74 64.75 0.57 4.41 2 4.28 2008 10 15.10 0.29 5.19 5.51 0.00 4.11 0 0.00 2009 4 6.37 0.04 0.06 5.53 0.00 0.74 0 0.00 Total 110 294.34 20.82 47.76 179.97 5.80 10.73 12 29.26

Annual

Rate 29.43 2.08 4.78 18.00 0.58 1.07 2.93 2009-2026 529.81 37.48 85.97 323.95 10.44 19.31 52.67

Add in Frictional or 'Churn'

requirement Plus: 2.80 12.21 6.68 0.27 5.49 n/a

Add in 'choice' factor Plus: 25% 50% 10% 50% 50% n/a

Projected total including choice factor for employment use

614.57 50.35 147.27 363.69 16.07 37.21

52.67

Source: DMBC; Employment Land Availability Surveys

The assembly of information needs some further interpretation to equate to the future sectors that are being planned for. B1 sector – this largely equates to office development located around Doncaster Lakeside and Balby Carr where the office market has largely developed. Also there has been some office development off Hayfield Lane near Robin Hood Airport. Using this take up as a guide is limited as the office sector can be supply led and this has been limited in Doncaster in the past whereas schemes are being prepared to enable it to take a “step change” coupled with urban renaissance objectives. In addition, out of town single or double story buildings with car parking will require larger site areas per floorspace provision compared to town centre sites which may be mixed use, have potential for multi-storey buildings with less requirement for car parking.

B2 sector – this mostly equates to “local employment sites” or development on industrial sites providing for manufacturing, business uses and smaller scale warehousing. This take-up rate provides a guide for future provision of the amount of land that should be provided taking into account the need for additional flexibility and choice plus space for other uses. B8 sector – this sector has seen rapid take-up using the employment provision for strategic sites in the UDP; Redhouse Interchange, West Moor Park, Trax Park, Balby Carr and reserve land at Nimbus Park. The table shows 185 hectares developed since 2000 and approximately 180 hectares of this is taken up by Strategic Warehousing. Using this as a basis for a future provision does result in a high need - 364 hectares. This is considered high for the following reasons:

47

• the take-up reflects the “golden period” of economic growth using UDP allocated sites; • the Logistics Strategy report by Atisreal considered that the commercial sector could provide

a take-up rate of around 500 jobs per annum over the plan period which is a lower rate for strategic warehouse jobs and is below the job rate over the same period which is 660 jobs per annum ( although this includes B8 jobs at the airport);

• some schemes have been developed as an “investment led” scheme rather than in response to demand – some of these units remain vacant at Balby Carr.

Mixed uses – this use is made up of schemes where B1/B2/B8 uses are intermixed. This identified supply should be located and provided on local employment sites. Other uses – employment sites attract other types of uses that can normally be accommodated on industrial estates such as car sales and some leisure and retail uses. During the survey period these “other uses” amounted to 29.3 hectares. The development of other uses provides an estimate of how much additional land should be provided on future employment sites for non B uses. Using the take-up method including taking account of choice and frictional factors results in the following land requirement;

Office 50 ha or an equivalent town centre floorspace B1/B2 253 ha including the mixed use and non B uses B8 364 ha

A further sector that is not accounted for is the Airport Business Park which is intended for airport related businesses. Section 7.9.4 discusses how jobs at the airport should be considered.

7.7 Economic Strategy Demand Assessment

The economic forecasting model and take-up rates analysis provide an assessment of future employment land requirement. Future demand to 2026 also needs to take account of economic strategy and public sector led actions required to transform the Doncaster economy. Without cognisance of this, the impact of strategies will be constrained in their effect and not represent spatial planning principles.

The Economic Strategy sets out interventions to enable Doncaster to reach its long term vision and reduce the economic performance gap. The interventions will need to be taken into account in identifying levels of future employment land provision and will impact upon the economic forecasts and take-up assessments of future land requirements. The specific interventions that affect spatial planning and land requirements are: Stimulating technology – land will need to be provided for managed workspace to stimulate a knowledge economy which includes a possible technology park. Currently, there is no location identified in Doncaster for a technology park. An essential ingredient is establishing links to higher education and an estates regime that will manage any park for technology uses. Promoting a 21st century skilled and diverse workforce – this focuses on raising aspirations and skills development but includes workforce diversity strategy. To achieve this, flexibility is required in the type and range of site needed to be brought forward. Exploiting Robin Hood’s Growth and Doncaster’s Exceptional Connectivity - Robin Hood Airport is identified as the Doncaster’s single most important asset and the strategy supports interventions to support its development as a catalyst. The strategy sets out a need for a comprehensive portfolio of sites for cargo and aviation businesses, a hub for training together with multi-modal access including the FARRRS proposals. The spatial implications are for a range of sites connected to the access routes to the airport to be provided.

48

Repositioning Doncaster – Inward Investors, Marketing and Image – this is largely about projecting a positive image of the town centre. This includes adopting a spatial model that supports landmark development in the town centre. Fostering a Dynamic Urban Core – this seeks transformation of the urban core and a balanced provision of sites including the current redevelopment proposals in the centre; CCQ, St Sepulchre Gate West, Waterfront and schemes in the wider urban core like Lakeside. The focus of offices in the urban core is supported to continue to develop niche retail units, bars and restaurants with good quality urban design and architecture. This will support and improve quality of life factors encouraging further inward investment. Dissipating office development risks establishing a critical mass of urban centre uses which supports a dynamic urban core. The focus also supports creating a ladder of accommodation from smaller flexible units through to strategic warehouses. This supports providing a comprehensive portfolio of land and property including: • sites to enable expansion, relocation and start up premises; • smaller office spaces in the centre; • continued realisation of strategic sites specifically in the M18 corridor with a differential

property offer. Supporting Economic Diversification and Sector Growth – this supports the development of sectors that will help diversify the Doncaster economy and provide growth. The sectors include advanced logistics, airport and freight opportunities, training, creative and digital industries. Each of these sectors is subject to emerging strategies to support their development. The Economic Strategy further considers the existing plans. Specifically it supports: • improved connectivity such as FARRRS, White Rose Way, Quality Bus Corridors; • skills development including the Building Schools for the Future programme; • innovation supporting incubation space and the Power Park at Hatfield; • economic diversity supporting creative and digital industries, and office based services; • projects supporting quality of life such as town centre regeneration schemes; • business premises – out of town developments at Lakeside, West Moor Park, sites adjacent

to the airport and Inland Port. It also supports proposed town centre schemes but the strategy notes the low supply of and demand for town centre office premises and need for more start up space in the town centre and local communities.

In conclusion, the Economic Strategy does not provide a quantitative calculation for allocating land but does set out policies and sectors that should be supported by a positive approach to the provision of land and sectors where growth should be supported. Such approaches may well require deviation from previous trends and be used to interpret the economic forecasts and the take up rates. Beside this, the key spatial messages of the interventions are: • focus office development in the town centre to foster a quality urban centre and quality of life; • develop a range of sites to provide for relocations, expansion and inward investment with a

focus on quality of sites; • ensure sufficient start up premises are brought forward in both the urban centre and

settlements around Doncaster; • provide business land around the airport to provide for training, aviation sector businesses

and air freight; • support advanced logistics premises in the M18 corridor; • provide a range and flexible supply of sites; • provide land around the Power Park at Hatfield; • provide land for a strategic rail freight interchange; • support deliverable land for a technology park;

49

7.8 Inward Investment Enquiry Analysis

Business enquires have been used in the past to assist in determining future requirements. The draft ELR did not include information on this as enquiries can be web based without any record details being recorded. The final ELR includes information which, although not used to determine any requirement, does provide information on business interest levels.

The Council’s Inward Investment Team manages its enquiries for employment investment through it’s Evolutive sites and premises database and enquiry handling system operated by Invest in Doncaster. Enquiries are recorded by 6 business sectors and by a size range. Output records enquires for employment related premises and land for the period 2004 – 2009 are set out below. These enquires are useful to supplement information on future requirements already considered. The recorded enquiries are set in table 12 for 6 different sectors. It shows that the total number of enquiries across all sectors 04 – 09 was 2249. The average is 450/year which has remained fairly consistent over the period.

Table 12 Total enquires from the Evolutive System by Sector 2004 – 2009.

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

2008-09 Total

Design and Build Enqs 12 15 36 50 52 165 Ha 2.66 33.27 30.72 122.18 34.66 223 Industrial Enqs 312 168 158 213 155 1006 Ha 87 74 138 275 83 657 Land Enqs 88 38 46 52 20 244 Hectares 410.54 128.91 106.68 935.39 832.23 2414 Managed Workspace - Office Enqs 2 6 21 60 73 162 Ha 0.08 0.42 0.20 93.49 11.18 105 Managed. Workspace - Workshop Enqs 1 0 1 32 60 94 Ha 0 0 0.10 2.75 5.94 8.79

Office Enq 168 89 79 116 126 578 Ha 7.87 9.48 9.30 105.27 15.56 147 Total Enquiries 583 316 341 523 486 2249 Total Ha 508 246 285 1534 982 3556

The charts show how the enquiries have changed over time. In the period 2007/08 there was a clear increase in overall interest but this has not tailed off equally across the sectors. Demand for general industry and land has clearly declined in the last year but all other sectors have continued their upward trend.

50

Fig 6 Enquiries for Business Sectors 2004/5 to 2008/9

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

D&B

Ind

Land

MWO

MWW

Office

The table below clearly shows the recessional impacts of less land being sought but did show growth in the period up to 2007/08 in particular for industry. This can be understood to represent the continued interest in industrial land for logistics and general industry. Fig 7 Enquiries by size and sector 04 – 09

0.00

50.00

100.00

150.00

200.00

250.00

300.00

2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Hec

tare

s

D&B

Ind

Land

MWO

MWW

Office

The most significant trends revealed by the data are:

• A drop in overall enquiry levels over the past 18 months. • Increased number of enquiries for small (sub 1000sq ft) Industrial units. • Increase in number of enquiries for smaller (sub 5000sqft) Managed Workspace both Office

and Workshop post 2006. • Increased number of enquiries for sub 5000sqft Office space in recent years.

51

Besides these conclusions from the enquiry data, there is some evidence gathered by the DMBC ‘Invest in Doncaster’ team that is not reflected in the Evolutive data; Manufacturing resurgence - there is a resurgence of manufacturing interest resulting from a combination of currency shifts, ongoing quality concerns and increased transport costs are forcing a number of companies to consider bringing back manufacturing capacity to the UK. The first wave of this re-location would be led by large companies but then it would be expected that the smaller supply base would follow. Impact of Digital Region Project - the impact of the Digital Region project is expected to have an impact on the number of enquiries for Office space in 2010 which should offer opportunities for a wide range of office based and ‘virtual’ business activities. Tenant Movement - some industrial estates are experiencing a net outflow of tenants and little interest from potential new occupiers reflecting recessional impacts. 7.9 Assessing Employment Sectors

Prior to assessing the overall employment requirements of the borough, there is a need to look at the employment sectors that the Economic Strategy is seeking to regenerate Doncaster. Doncaster’s future is clearly built around several sectors. Of these, four require specific space requirements to enable them to prosper and meet the objectives of the Economic Strategy and other government policies;

7.9.1 Offices

The future provision is based on the emerging schemes in the town centre. The floor spaces used in the economic model represent best available knowledge from land agents (CCQ), strategies (Waterfront) and LDF preferred options (St Sepulchre Gate West), other potential smaller sites. Unlike employment land, the demand is largely based on public supported development schemes supported by research into Doncaster’s office sector by Knight Frank and the DTZ Ladder of Accommodation Study (both these studies are on the LDF evidence base website – www.doncaster.gov.uk/ldf). Should office demand increase above these levels, the increased demand could be met by: • increasing the level of office floorspace by increasing the building height (subject to emerging

policies concerning the height of buildings); • increase the proportion of office floorspace within mixed schemes with displaced uses

locating to alternative sites depending on their use; • utilise other redevelopment and windfall sites that are under-used in the town centre or on its

edge.

Due to the building height and variable plot ratios for town centre offices, the office requirement has not been calculated into a land quantum but rather left as a floorspace. This also recognises that Doncaster does not have a clear trend of town centre offices to assist in suitable building height or plot density assumptions. Another consideration is that there is no clear office type requirement established in Doncaster. Therefore sites will need to be flexible and a choice factor applied to ensure sufficient sites are available to meet the anticipated demands of this sector. For example, the sector could grow from small based professional services offices to a “Lyons type” government department relocation from London requiring a large-footprint site. Further research is required to assist in developing strategies to capture a significant office sector in accordance with the Economic Strategy. Of the three major town centre schemes, each are located in different areas of the town with a separate rationale and with a range of potential footprints and outlooks. What is important is that each has excellent access from public transport routes and is able to offer sustainable locations to occupiers. The floorspace figure is calculated from the jobs forecast by applying a jobs density which is 18 sq m per worker. There is some expectation that this will reduce due to home working, but

52

discussion in the Roger Tym Report considers that there is no clear evidence that it will reduce and on the contrary more variable working patterns may lessen the effect.

7.9.2 Strategic Warehousing Sector

This sector has been growing in Doncaster as described elsewhere. Appropriate skill levels have been found in Doncaster together with excellent locations near to the motorway network and there is scope to consider bringing forward sustainable sites to meet this sector. The forecast reflects the schemes being brought forward by the market together with other regional locational policies. To assist in planning this sector, OE used the ABI sectors relating to large distribution sheds that can be accommodated within on strategic sites rather than smaller business parks. This figure then provides a basis for planning larger distribution parks which have different site location criteria such as locations near to the strategic transport network and large sites with few topographical constraints.

The approach is to use the “policy on” forecast of an annual growth of around 840 jobs per annum over the plan period. (It should be noted that this figure has increased since the draft ELR as the OE work more accurately models the anticipated jobs at both Inland Port and the Airport). The work being undertaken by Atisreal on behalf of the Council on a Logistics Sector Strategy confirms this as a level that the strategic warehousing sector is able to sustain about 500 jobs per annum over the LDF period. This is 340 below the “policy on” forecasts, however it should be noted: • the 500 is still below recent trends in strategic warehouse growth between 2000 and 2006; • the 840 figure includes warehousing at the airport which is outside of the 500 jobs considered

by Atisreal. • the Atisreal study did not specifically consider the impact of the Inland Port which provides a

substantial number of jobs and may attract higher levels of investment to Doncaster.

The updated OE forecasts built around the anticipated project provides a higher figure for the total number of jobs than in the draft ELR. This is underpinned through several large projects being planned and accounted for; Inland Port, West Moor Park, Bradholme Farm and the DN7 project. The success of these schemes, subject to approval, remains to be seen and depends on the growth in the economy, success of freight to rail strategies and transport infrastructure improvements.

7.9.3 Local employment uses made up of Non-Strategic Warehousing and B1b/c and B2 Business Uses

This has been separately identified as this sector is more likely to be located in “local” employment sites in conjunction with other business uses. On such industrial estates or sites permission may often be granted for B2 or B8 uses. As such it is considered correct to make provision for some B8 uses separate from strategic sites where they can use smaller premises in more accessible locations and where impacts on surrounding uses will be similar or less than B2 uses. The “SIC mapping exercise” undertaken as part of the economic modelling identified B8 uses (using SIC codes) more likely to locate on strategic sites or non strategic sites. B1b/c and B2 Business Uses equate to local employment uses that do not require strategic sites to accommodate large building footprints. Being smaller in nature they have less need to be located near to motorways as they can be accommodated within or on the edge of urban areas in accordance with the settlement hierarchy. This improves accessibility from communities and public transport routes. Some existing sites in this category may be poorly located due to lack of access to strategic routes. Also it is noted that some suitable sites have low scores resulting from lack of strategic access and urban locations. The RSS in Policy E3b identifies the need to review sites and re-allocate them for alternative uses where there is a lack of demand and poorly located. This review and the Core Strategy offer the opportunity to find more sustainable uses for such sites. Where sites in current employment use are re-allocated, new alternative sites may be needed adding to additional land being needed in the allocations beside the net figures calculated.

53

7.9.4 Robin Hood Airport

The airport is identified as an economic driver for the region by the Sheffield CRDP and the RSS identifies it as a Regionally Significant Investment Opportunity. The impact of RHADS is therefore beyond the boundary of Doncaster including the take up of job opportunities at the airport. The Airport Master Plan identifies that 54% of jobs are taken up by Doncaster residents but the Council has a target of 70% of future jobs to be taken up by Doncaster residents. The Airport Master Plan (AMP) covers the period to 2030 whereas the Core Strategy covers the period to 2026. The economic model includes 8,500 jobs in the Airport Business Park and 5,000 direct jobs at the airport itself. These figures relate to the development of the existing business parks, the phase 3 business park (alongside the airport access road) and the proposed cargo transhipment terminal. A single job figure for the business park employment levels is used which is mid way between the range of high and low job densities. It also assumes that the FARRRS link road will be implemented and the higher “base case” is used as set out in the Airport Master Plan Comparing the employment figures to land quantum is not straight forward as factors depend on re-development density, airfreight terminal proposals and the current proposals are draft and subject to further change. An assessment of the available development sites shows that there is approximately 32.4 hectares of land within the extent of the site already granted planning consent with a further 30.7 hectares of potential development land to the west. In addition, there is a proposed cargo freight terminal which does not have a specific site area at this stage but which can be expected to contribute to the land supply. The jobs at the airport are excluded from the calculations for employment land need as they are linked functionally and geographically to the airport and cannot be provided elsewhere. In addition, there have been longer term aspirations to extend the aviation educational facilities at the airport. These will depend on government funding and future allocations around the airport will need to be flexible to accommodate future proposals where they are sustainable, justified and meet the needs of the Economic Strategy.

7.10 Conclusions on Employment Land Demand

The objective of the “assessing the demand exercise” is to identify the amount of land that should be provided in the Borough ensuring its future direction can be sustained (as set out in the Economic Strategy) and not constrained by insufficient employment land. The table below brings together the economic forecasting and take-up assessments and applies the spatial outcomes of the economic strategy to reach a conclusion on what levels of employment land should be provided in the Local Development Framework.

Government guidance suggests that ELR’s should be reviewed every 3 years. This will provide a sufficient length of time for new trends and commercial changes to materialise and feed into the assessment for future employment land. In this ELR, most recent information has been used (and updated since the March 2009 draft). These data sets e.g. ABI, economic strategy, project progress, will be monitored and if there are significant variances adjustments may be needed to the employment land required prior to any 3 yearly review.

54

Table 13: Proposed Net Additional Amount of Land for Employment Sectors.

Sector Policy On Requirement (See table 10)

Take Up Requirement (hectares) (See table 11)

Economic Strategy

Proposed level of net additional employment land provision

Rationale

Office, (B1a)

124,000 sq m 50.4 ha (equates to 201,400 sq m based on single storey developments)

Requires quality urban centre sites including CCQ, Waterfront and St Sepulchre Gate West

180,000 sq m Provides for anticipated office schemes plus other private sector led investment and opportunities in the town centre. Also alignment with Economic Strategy to establish buoyant office sector market mutually supporting urban renaissance objectives & impact of digital region.

Local Sites (B2/B8)

52 ha 253 ha (includes provision for B2, B8 non-strategic, Mixed emp sites and ‘other’ uses)

Requires a range of sites in local communities including managed workspace

200 ha The proposed level is balanced between 52 and 253ha but weighted toward take-up rate to provide for historic development rates but reduced to reflect policy on forecast. It is also high to accommodate the economic strategy objectives to support diversification, inward investment in manufacturing and high skilled business plus ensure land is provided near communities.

Strategic Sites (B8)

353 ha 364 ha Requires a range of sites to support advanced logistics and maximising strategic transport connections.

310 ha Sufficient sites to establish advanced logistics sector and incorporates provision for market led demand exhibited by pipeline schemes but recognising “golden era” of recent growth cannot be sustained. Empty rates legislation will depress speculative development.

Robin Hood Airport

The policy on requirement reflects the Airport Master Plan Proposals

Insufficient data to determine need from take-up rate and future rates will be positively affected by FARRRS

Requires business land around the airport to attract aviation cluster including training, cargo and aviation engineering

74 ha based on the draft Airport Master Plan which extends to 2030. This includes 53.3has that has outline planning consent and includes a new cargo terminal.

Proposed employment areas reflect the long term opportunities identified in the draft Airport Master Plan, the Regional Significant Investment Priority status of the airport and opportunities emerging through public sector activity and improved access e.g. FARRRS.

The assessment for the land requirements are subject to various assumptions and risks as to their “fulfilment”. As stated, there is no overall method for establishing a future land requirement and further planning documents will put forward monitoring regimes. Table 14 sets out some of the principle risks applied to each of the sectors. This provides both a “realism check” and a pointer to actions required to mitigate risks.

55

Table 14: Table of Risk and Actions Related to Employment Sectors. Sector Risk Downside risk – less land is required Upside risk – more land is required Action All sectors Recovered from recession take longer.

Digital region has a positive impact on inward investment levels in South Yorkshire

Monitor economic activity and inward investment levels to assess need for early review of ELR.

Office sector The credit crunch is prolonged, lowering demand. Low historic demand and supply levels prevail. The additional floorspace is unable to attract inward investment against competing regional centres. Insufficient skills are available.

The low quality of the office sector may be reversed and attract inward investment. The Market will value strategic rail connectivity and respond. A ‘Lyons Report’ relocation could stimulate an exceptional office demand. The public sector led schemes and related policies will uplift demand above expectations. The airport and logistics sector will have positive impacts on business space.

Provide pro-active marketing of the town centre. The public sector to continue to lead on office sector schemes. Provide a range of sites in the town centre. Continue to invest in a quality urban environment. Link development to training & skills development. Continue to support the aviation sector and logistics sector and their supply chains.

B2 sector Insufficient freehold sites available. Continued economic downturn or prolonged recovery suppresses demand. Transport constraints redirect investment elsewhere. Poor choice and quality of sites available

Re-location of manufacturing to Far East diminishes. Range of sites, improved skills levels attract higher levels of investment. Robin Hood Airport and other initiatives stimulate growth. Higher housing supply attracts investment. High proportion of employment land is used for non b1/2/8 uses

Monitor site take up and economic changes. Support choice factor at 50% plus a 25% factor for alternative use on employment land. Provide site criteria to support 5 year land supply requirements. Public sector to lead in removing transport constraints. Promote Robin Hood Airport and Doncaster’s other benefits to stimulate investment.

B8 Strategic warehousing sector

Vacant supply will “soak up” future demand. Economic downturn or prolonged recovery will suppress demand. Skill levels and poor perception of B8 constrain workforce. Strategic highway constraints are not mitigated. Higher jobs densities may be achieved requiring less land

Additional demand is stimulated by Doncaster’s multi-modal offer. Humber Ports thrive and increase demand. A critical mass is achieved and centre of excellence achieved encouraging growth. Removal of transport constraints stimulate demand

Consider provide criteria for identifying additional suitable sites. Develop skills and training tailored to the logistics sector. Improve branding of Doncaster as a logistics centre. Prioritise removing transport constraints through FARRRS and joint working with Highways Agency and SYPTE. Monitor research in to job densities and measure where possible job densities in Doncaster.

Aviation sector

Aviation growth is not maintained. FARRRS is not delivered. Local skill levels are insufficient to attract aviation sector occupiers

Demand is relocated from the South East England due to airport incapacity. Effects of FARRRS delivery stimulates additional demand above expected levels. DMBC aviation strategy has positive impacts. Key occupiers attract supply chains. Critical mass is achieved which stimulates further growth

Public sector continues to support aviation cluster e.g. TOA, Aviation Strategy, FARRRS. Monitor take-up and enquiries in airport business land. Implement FARRRS. Improve branding of Doncaster logistics capability. Identify land that can be brought forward to support increased levels of need. Improve skill levels and training.

56

7.11 Where will the new jobs be provided in Doncaster?

Doncaster currently enjoys a self-contained job market compared to other boroughs. The 2001 census showed that 76% of residents worked in Doncaster. This proportion is high compared to surrounding local authorities. This also takes into account the Dearne area where there are high levels of commuting out to Rotherham, which is closer than many parts of Doncaster. Overall, Doncaster is a fairly self contained job market meaning people will move within the Borough to employment. This partly reflects the traditional approach to employment patterns where people lived and worked within the same local community and this legacy remains whereby there is aspiration to live and work in locations close by. The modern economy cannot always deliver this aspiration but Doncaster is nevertheless well placed to provide jobs that its residents can access although not always within the same settlement.

Table 15: showing proportion of workers who are employed in their district of residence Total number of

workers in district Number of workers who live in district

%

Barnsley 88,762 59,253 67Doncaster 118,362 89,434 76Rotherham 106,489 65,264 61Sheffield 218,493 180,806 84Bassetlaw 46,145 32,812 71

Source: Table 05 Roger Tym Report, Census 2001 The table below shows in more detail where Doncaster residents work and where its workers live. Table 16: showing where Doncaster workers live/are employed by local authorities.

Area Work in Doncaster %

Live in Don work in % Net worker

migration Barnsley 2,193 2.02% 1,814 1.54% 379 Bassetlaw 2,249 2.07% 1,797 1.52% 452 Bradford 100 0.09% 217 0.18% -117 Chesterfield 110 0.10% 148 0.13% -38 Doncaster 89,438 82.36% 89,438 75.88% 0 East Riding of Yorkshire 796 0.73% 919 0.78% -123 Kingston upon Hull 135 0.12% 232 0.20% -97 Kirklees 244 0.22% 260 0.22% -16 Leeds 474 0.44% 2,079 1.76% -1,605 North Lincolnshire 1,869 1.72% 2,199 1.87% -330 Rotherham 4,816 4.44% 6,298 5.34% -1,482 Selby 407 0.37% 1,275 1.08% -868 Sheffield 1,946 1.79% 3,776 3.20% -1,830 Wakefield 1,164 1.07% 2,521 2.14% -1,357 York 224 0.21% 444 0.38% -220 Other 2425 2.23% 4449 3.77% -2,024

Total 108,590 117,866

Daily in migration %

Daily out migration % Net daily migration

19,152 18% 28,428 24% -9,276

57

Table 16 shows where Doncaster residents work. 24% of Doncaster working residents travel to locations outside of Doncaster to work. It also shows that there is no one location that commuters travel to. The more significant flows are to the neighbouring areas of Rotherham and Wakefield. The largest flow is to Sheffield reflecting the good transport links and possibly greater range of jobs. The next table looks more closely at where Doncaster residents that work in the Borough travel to for work. This is based on the 2001 ward boundaries.

Table 17: Location of residents job by ward (2001)

Ward All

working total

Work outside LA %

Work in own Ward %

Work in Don in

other Ward % Adwick 5,909 1,189 20% 1,671 28% 3,049 52% Armthorpe 7,377 1,085 15% 1,882 26% 4,410 60% Askern 4,285 1,259 29% 1,409 33% 1,617 38% Balby 5,509 942 17% 1,414 26% 3,153 57% Bentley Central 4,072 637 16% 1,023 25% 2,412 59% Bentley North Road 4,808 744 15% 1,049 22% 3,015 63% Bessacarr & Cantley 5,156 933 18% 1,064 21% 3,159 61% Central 3,698 466 13% 1,099 30% 2,133 58% Conisbrough 4,650 1,466 32% 1,436 31% 1,748 38% Edlington & Warmsworth 4,717 852 18%

1,460

31% 2,405 51%

Hatfield 6,611 951 14% 2,315 35% 3,345 51% Intake 3,730 490 13% 923 25% 2,317 62% Mexborough 5,404 2,473 46% 1,783 33% 1,148 21% Richmond 6,424 1,661 26% 1,383 22% 3,380 53% Rossington 4,915 726 15% 1,350 27% 2,839 58% South East 7,683 1,336 17% 2,085 27% 4,262 55% Southern Parks 6,292 1,803 29%

1,575

25% 2,914 46%

Stainforth 6,450 1,066 17% 1,682 26% 3,702 57% Thorne 6,189 1,429 23% 2,792 45% 1,968 32% Town Field* 4,079 634 16% 1,484 36% 1,961 48% Wheatley 4,129 575 14% 1,332 32% 2,222 54%

Totals 112,087 22,717 20% 32,211 29% 57,159 51% * Most of the town centre is included in the Town Field ward. Plan 2 (annexed) includes a ward map of Doncaster.

The table shows that there are few places in Doncaster where there are a high proportion of residents working locally apart from Thorne which is a stand alone town where 45% of its residents work in the town. Rather, Doncaster residents travel to a range of locations within the Borough to work. The Dearne wards have high percentages of residents working outside, most likely in adjacent Rotherham. Only Mexborough shows a low proportion of residents working in Doncaster.

58

Another factor to consider are the locations of future jobs. The OE work identifies the sectors of jobs and those that are created in the non B sector i.e. those that are provided within the existing employment “fabric” such as jobs in hospitals, schools, leisure centres. Table 18: Proportion of jobs in the B/non B sectors (policy on scenario).

2008-2026 % Total jobs

2026 %

B Space Offices B1a 5,600 11.99 21,865 12.25 Industry B1b/c & B2 1,575 3.37 20,602 19.51 Storage & Distribution B8 15,570 33.32 30,523 28.91 Non B Space 23,977

51.32 105,586 58.11

Total 46,722 100 178,587 100

Source; Oxford Economics Nov 2009

The table shows that over half the extra jobs that need to be provided will not be in any “B class” sector and that by 2026 nearly 60% of jobs will not be in the “B class” sectors . The implications of tables 13 and 14 are:

• Doncaster has a fairly self contained job market where residents will travel about the Borough

or just outside if there are adjacent urban areas; • the scope for directly influencing the location of a large proportion of new jobs is limited as

they will not be subject to specific land allocations; • locating new land allocations cannot be the only answer to improving employment deprivation

levels. Access strategies to existing services centres will be highly relevant; • an over emphasis on new land allocations as the sole response to meeting economic

regeneration needs of deprived communities is insufficient; • it is unlikely that placing employment allocations next to population centres will result in local

take up of jobs – it is likely that residents from other areas in the Borough will take up those jobs;

• the apparent preponderance of new job opportunities in the M18 corridor is not as severe as there are far more service sector jobs being created in the main urban area accessible from all parts of the Borough;

• an emphasis should be placed on locating employment sites in commercially attractive locations.

• land should be provided for suitable alternative uses on employment sites required to provide for “non b class” jobs such as leisure and health care where they can be sustainably provided. The ELR proposes a 25% factor on non strategic sites to accommodate such uses.

7.12 Other Policies Affecting Location of Future Employment Sites

Flood Risk – Doncaster has a large proportion of land covered by high flood risk areas following the Rover Don and Dearne corridors. Historically, these areas have attracted older traditional manufacturing industries but not so much the former mining industry. PPS25 requires the application of a sequential test to demonstrate that there are no reasonable available sites in areas with a lower probability of flooding that would be appropriate to the type of development being proposed. Employment uses are identified as less vulnerable uses which can be located in higher risk areas but their justification still needs to pass a sequential test. The effects of this may result in development being directed away from areas of deprivation, more accessible sites and commercially attractive areas unless a need can be demonstrated which overrides the need to locate development away from higher risk areas.

Green Belt – The undeveloped western side of Doncaster is covered by the South Yorkshire Green Belt. RSS policies are to retain the general extent of the Green Belt in South Yorkshire. Therefore new sites can only be brought forward where there are exceptional circumstances

59

which can demonstrate a need to override the objectives of the Green Belt. Generally, this will tend to favour new employment sites being put forward in the east of the Borough such as has been witnessed by the growth in strategic warehousing in the M18 corridor although other factors have attracted development. However, if a range of sites and locations are to be provided and commercially attractive sites located near to communities there may be a need to use existing Green Belt sites if exceptional circumstances exist. Use of Brownfield Land – RSS policies favour use of brownfield land over use of undeveloped land. In Doncaster, such sites can attract housing uses as the higher housing values can assist in bringing forward brownfield sites as compared to alternative uses. The policy to prioritise brownfield land for development will affect the location of new employment sites where there is no competition from housing values. These may not always be the most sustainable sites taking account of floodrisk, areas of deprivation and market ready sites. As noted, the complexities of redevelopment funding and competition from housing uses will also need to be taken in to account. Settlement Hierarchy – the RSS and the emerging Core Strategy have policies in place to support settlement patterns that will be more sustainable. These policies largely focus development on urban areas to create attractive and cohesive places where people will want to live and work. The scoring of sites takes this into account, however, it must be noted that some new sectors identified in the Economic Strategy are not suitable for development within urban areas. Development of Robin Hood Airport is locationally specific and logistics developments need to locate where access to strategic networks is available and where 24 hour working will not impact on adjacent areas. Employment Sectors – this document outlines the approach to developing new sectors in Doncaster which will require a new pattern of employment land. This is fully recognised in the RSS which encourages Local Authorities to meet the needs of the modern economy and de-allocate older undeveloped land-use allocations. The three new sectors identified in Doncaster have their own distinctive spatial requirement which will largely drive their location:

1. Logistics – will require topographically flat sites with good accessibility to the strategic transport network. This, together with access to the Humber Ports, rail and air facilities favours, development in the M18 corridor.

2. Aviation – this needs to locate where air services are available and other uses including training facilities can coalesce as a supportive cluster. Sites around Robin Hood Airport provide for this where an ample supply of land that can be exploited with a developing track record of investment in air facility and related training. It will be important to protect these areas for such business uses related to the airport. 3. Offices – current policy approaches support development in town centres and in particular Doncaster where there is a strong urban renaissance programme designed to support the transformation of the Borough and take advantage of the accessibility of the town centre. Doncaster town centre does not have a strong investment pattern in offices hence it will be important that current projects are fully supported and not undermined by alternative locations.

Regeneration – Doncaster has a sporadic settlement pattern with many places being former coalfield communities where the employment provider has ceased. Consideration will need to be given to ensure job opportunities are provided to such communities and access is provided to new job sectors in the borough. This may require using green belt sites or sites that score poorly but which still retain commercial viability plus requiring new developments to provide/support public transport links. The above locational factors and the need to provide sites that are deliverable poses tensions that may not be easy to resolve. The scoring criteria employed assists in measuring some of these factors but cannot fully balance the competing factors. This indeed is not the role of the Employment Land Review but the Allocations DPD will propose a suitable land supply taking account of the conclusions of the Employment Land Review and other spatial requirements for example Doncaster’s SHLAA published in March 2009.

60

8. Review of the Employment Land Portfolio

One of the key features of the Employment Land Review is to undertake an evaluation of the Borough’s employment sites. This should look at both existing sites (developed and undeveloped) and those which have been put forward as representations through the development plan process. Together with the supply and demand assessment, the evaluation will assist in making decisions on identifying those existing sites which are either unlikely to be required by the market or are now unsustainable for employment use and therefore could be better developed for other uses; and those sites which may be suitable for future employment development (i.e. as allocations in the Local Development Framework). Therefore taking into account the above requirements, a total of 89 existing employment sites and 77 proposed sites have been assessed. A plan showing the distribution of sites across the Borough is attached at plan 3 together with a list of sites by the geographical area they are located in. Plan 4 shows the sites that will be affected by FARRRS. To undertake the analysis, a Site Assessment Methodology was produced having regard to the guidance set out in the ODPM document ‘Employment Land Review: Guidance Note’ (ODPM 2004).

8.1 Site Assessment Methodology

The methodology is based around four key themes which are given equal weight: 1. Policy Issues; 2. Access; 3. Environmental Heritage and Resource; 4. Marketability and Deliverability. Within each theme, a number of criteria are used to assess the site’s suitability in relation to that topic. The criteria take into account any issues regarded as being important through planning policy guidance and best practice such as Central Government Planning Policy Statements and Regional Guidance. Some local factors are also included. Each of the four issues is addressed in turn: 1. Policy Issues - This section addresses the issue of Settlement Category as included in the Doncaster Core Strategy; whether the site is currently allocated as Green Belt; and the compatibility of the site with key policy documents namely the RSS and the Doncaster Economic Strategy. The site’s ability to provide additional benefits to the community is included as a further criterion. 2. Access to Jobs - Rather than simply looking at access by public transport and by the strategic highway network, this theme also examines the proximity of the site to deprived areas of the Borough and how much of the Borough’s population can travel to the site within a 30 minute public transport travel time. 3. Environmental Heritage and Resource - There are a variety of issues included within this theme. The potential impact on environmental designated sites such as SSI’s, SSSI’s and heritage features is assessed along with the loss of agricultural land and the protection of aquifers and minerals. 4. Marketability and Deliverability - The likelihood of the site coming forward for development or being retained for employment is assessed within this theme through market activity/developer interest; ownership constraints; the quality of the existing layout/buildings; compatibility of neighbouring uses; and topography, size and shape.

61

8.2 Flood Risk

Please note that the methodology does not include flood risk. This is because flood risk is a separate test set out in PPS25 which will be addressed through the LDF preparation process and through individual planning applications. The Allocations Development Plan Document will consider the relative level of flood risk for sites which are within the same flood zone.

8.3 Reflecting differing circumstances

The methodology was developed to allow the Council to be able to plan for a variety of circumstances and to reflect the nature of planning for employment uses. For this to happen not all the criteria are applied for each site; instead, those used depend upon what type of site is being assessed, and the proposed development (based on the Use Class Order). In short the differing circumstances are: Type of site: • Criteria to be used just for ‘existing’ sites; • Criteria to be used for ‘proposed/existing undeveloped’ sites; • Criteria to be used for both types of site. Proposed development: • B1 – Business; • B2 – General Industrial; • B8 – Storage and Distribution.

Each site is effectively assessed three times in terms of its suitability for B1, B2 and B8 uses, and this is reflected in the site assessment sheets in Schedule 2. Overall, the total score for each theme is then divided by the number of criteria used. In some cases this will be the full number of criteria. Some criteria are scored as ‘null’ where no score is provided as it would be wrong to apply a score where it is not relevant. The individual criteria scores have been added together for each group to provide a comparative total for each theme. These then contribute to an overall total that is used to inform the overall assessment. It should be noted that some criteria require an element of judgement.

It should also be noted that the assessment is for individual sites and in certain circumstances a cumulative impact will need to be considered. This is particularly the case where major sites have a cumulative impact on the Strategic Highway Network such as the M18. Sites may therefore be constrained where there is insufficient capacity. The full Site Assessment Methodology is shown in Appendix A, complete with explanation notes showing how the criteria were measured. The four right hand columns of the Methodology table show which criteria were applied under the differing circumstances described above. For the purpose of the Employment Review proposed sites are defined as being those put forward as representations through the LDF process and those existing allocated sites which are currently undeveloped.

8.4 B1 Definition

The Use Classes Order (6th April 2006) defines B1 Business as being: a) offices – other than a use within Class A2; b) research and development of products or processes; c) light industry; however for the purposes of the Site Selection methodology B1 is defined as being offices only.

62

8.5 Data Collection methods

All collected data is inputted into a spreadsheet and database so that analysis can be undertaken on a site by site basis and on Use Class. The majority of the data was compiled by Officers within the DMBC Development Directorate including Officers specialising in planning, transport, economic development and ecology using a variety of data collection methods including GIS data and site visits. The South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive provided data on the ‘Access by Public Transport’ criterion using the Accession model. As mentioned above, all sites were visited in order to validate the information collected in-house as well as to pick up any additional important information such as who the main occupiers/end users are. A copy of the Site Validation Sheet is included at Appendix H with the data collected for each site included in Schedule 4. At least one photograph of each site (where access would allow) was taken to record its condition. Schedule 2 sets out the site data sheets for each site surveyed (including data site key). Each sheet contains basic data including address and planning status. The site’s score in respect of B1, B2 and B8 uses is also listed including a description summary highlighting site condition and location, as well as current and future demand. Each site also has a Key Finding which indicates how the site should be treated through the Allocations DPD and planning application process. Key Findings The key findings were arrived at by looking at the individual scores for the sites together with other relevant information. A quintile rating has been used to help describe the relative quality of the site in order to provide an overall guide. This information will be used when assessing which sites should be proposed for allocation in the Allocations DPD but will still need to take account of other factors such as flood risk, accessibility to principal towns and regeneration and green belt. It is not proposed that the Allocations DPD will simply take the highest scoring sites forward without reference to other issues. The Options are: Option A) Site to be retained as an employment allocation Option B) Site to be potentially re-allocated for alternative uses

Option C) Site potentially suitable as an employment allocation subject to further issues Option D) Site not considered suitable as an employment site Option E) Site to be potentially suitable for mixed-use Options A and B apply to those sites which are existing developed, partially developed or existing undeveloped sites while Options C and D apply to those proposed sites put forward as representations for employment land to be designated in the LDF. Option C and further issues Option C states that a site is potentially suitable subject to further issues. These issues vary from site to site and include: • justification of need i.e. to show that the site is required to meet demand; • implementation of a town centre use sequential test; • implementation of the PPS25 flood risk sequential test; • the restriction of an air related condition (this relates to sites around RHADS); • the boundary of the site being amended to include a smaller site area.

63

As stated above each site is given a Key Finding option which will be used to inform decisions as to how the site is taken forward through the Allocations DPD, i.e. a key finding is not an allocation. The Key Finding does not confer any planning decision but it will form part of the evidence base in considering any future planning applications. The difference between Options B and E There is an important difference which distinguishes Options B and E. Option B describes those sites where employment uses are not considered appropriate and therefore uses such as residential or countryside may be more suitable. Option E – ‘Site to be potentially suitable for mixed use’, describes those sites where uses including employment may be appropriate. For example some sites may be a mix of employment and housing, or employment and retail. Option B) Site to be potentially re-allocated for alternative uses Option E) Site to be potentially suitable for mixed-use

8.6 Employment Land Review Technical Group One of the important stages of the ELR process was to check private sector market realities and aspirations. This was undertaken through the creation of an Employment Land Review Technical Group which consisted of inviteees from the Doncaster Property Forum (attendees are listed in Appendix I). The Technical Group was used as a way to assess the qualities, suitability and deliverability of individual sites and this was achieved by discussing and verifying the ‘Marketability and Deliverability’ scores. Each site was originally scored by DMBC Officers and through discussions with the Technical Group a number of changes were made. The Technical Group comments are shown in Appendix I. Any conflict of interest was declared. A total of three workshops were held. The first explained the LDF and ELR process, discussed current market conditions and agreed the way forward. The second workshop discussed the existing sites while the third discussed the potential sites. Due to the amount of existing sites within the Borough (89 in total) it was considered that this was too large an amount to be assessed within the timeframe and that there were a number which did not warrant further consideration by the Technical Group. These were: • sites that are successful with modern buildings and a large amount of recent investment; • sites that scored very poorly through the Site Assessment Scoring process and are therefore

recommended to be re-allocated for alternative uses. This process left a total of 41 sites to be appraised and verified by the Technical Group.

8.7 Mixed use schemes

The Council has aspirations for three key sites in Doncaster Town Centre to become mixed-use schemes. The three areas are the Civic and Cultural Quarter, Doncaster Waterfront and Marshgate. Each scheme is at a different stage of implementation, the most advanced being CCQ where an outline planning application has now been granted.

It is highly likely that there will be other sites in the Borough which are privately owned, which may be suitable for mixed use development. As part of the consultation on the Draft ELR and through the Technical Group workshops, comments were made on sites potentially suitable for either mixed use development or an alternative use. The views of the Technical Panel were taken into account when finalising the key findings of each site and these are recorded in appendix I.

8.8 Site Assessment Findings

This section summarises the sites with regard to the key findings and conclusions. It is the first step in identifying Doncaster’s employment land portfolio to meet future requirements and market needs. The tables below are a summary of the site findings sheets included at Schedule 2 and

64

are broken down into those sites which are existing sites and proposed/existing but undeveloped. Schedule 3 includes a listing of all the individual criteria scores for all sites.

8.8.1 Existing Sites

The table below identifies those sites which are recommended to be retained for employment use i.e. have been considered under Option A. The sites total 1074.57 hectares. Table 19: Sites to be retained as an employment allocation (Option A)

Site ref Site Name

Area (ha)

14 Nimbus park, Thorne 26.4525 Hunt Lane, Bentley 3.7233 Former Car Park, Princes St, Doncaster 0.0452 BMW site Off Junction 6 M18, Thorne 21.2155 Carcroft Enterprise park, Carcroft 12.7556 Owston Common, Carcroft 6.0359 Millfield Road, Bentley 5.7361 Optima site off Askern Road, Toll Bar. 2.4967 Brunel Road Estate, York Rd, Doncaster. 5.3068 Factory Site, Ings Road, Bentley. 5.1269 Bentley Ings, Ings Road, Bentley. 2.0671 The Ings, Power Station Road, Marshgate. 8.4072 Clayfields Industrial Estate Balby. 5.0073 Kelham Street, Balby Bridge, Doncaster. 4.6474 Hexthorpe Industrial Estate, Hexthorpe. 6.3277 Site off Sheffield Road, Consisbrough. 0.8878 Depot Site, Clifton Hill, Consibrough. 0.7579 Kearsley Brook, Conisbrough. 2.1780 Whitelea Grove, Mexborough. 4.8781 Works Site, Station Road, Bawtry. 1.7582 Hudsons Yard - Depot Site, Bawtry. 2.8583 Bawtry Carbon, Austerfield. 11.9986 Westmoor Park, Armthorpe. 70.8887 Redhouse, Brodsworth. 84.7388 Capitol Park, Thorne. 31.2894 Chase Park, Redhouse, Brodsworth. 7.0095 Carcroft Common North, Carcroft. 34.35

101 Balby Carr 2 (First Point Bus. Park), Balby Carr. 98.35

102 Balby Carr 1 (Wright BP & Railport), Balby Carr. 17.39103 Balby Carr Bank, Balby Carr. 42.32105 Doncaster Carr/White Rose Way, Doncaster. 45.81106 Rail Station & Works Site, Doncaster. 23.64108 Airport site RHADS. 16.39

109 Sports Ground & Hayfield Business park (Airport) 7.87111 Bankwood Lane, Rossington. 28.92114 NCB Records Office Doncaster Road Denaby 1.46116 Wheatley Hall Road 1, Wheatley. 5.83117 Wheatley Hall Road 2, Wheatley. 23.46118 Wheatley Hall Road 4, Wheatley. 31.66

65

124 King Edward Road, Thorne. 4.49125 Coulman Road Industrial Estate, Thorne. 18.70126 Bootham Lane, Hatfield. 9.60127 Gunhills Lane, Armthorpe. 15.03

128 Kirk Sandall Industrial Estate & Guildhall Ind. Est 47.95129 Kirk Sandall Industrial Estate West 36.80130 Shaw Lane, Wheatley. 26.52131 Churchill Road, Wheatley. 9.08132 North of Station Road, Askern. 3.25133 Planet Road, Carcroft Common. 17.05135 Carcroft Extension 2, Carcroft. 8.00136 Mexborough South, Mexborough. 7.26137 Denaby Lane Ind Est, Denaby. 28.99138 Warmsworth Halt Industrial Est, Warmsworth. 15.74139 Broomhouse Land Ind Est, Edlington. 12.72142 Lakeside 1, Lakeside, Doncaster. 21.84143 Lakeside, Lakeside, Doncaster. 3.64147 Wheatley Hall Road 5, Wheatley. 22.80149 Railport Site, Doncaster Carr. 10.92

150 Lakeside Village/Doncaster Carr, Balby. 15.04151 Trax Park, Balby Carr. 16.90161 Mexborough Business Centre, Mexborough. 1.09163 Wheatley Hall Road 6, Wheatley. 9.30

1074.31

Table 20 below shows those existing sites which it is considered could be re-allocated for alternative uses i.e. Option B. These sites include those which have scored poorly through the site assessment criteria and those which have been developed during the period of the UDP for uses other than employment e.g. the Leisure Park. Which alternative uses each site could be re-allocated to have not been considered at this time and is not the subject of this ELR. The alternative use will depend upon the individual site and its circumstances but may include countryside policy area and residential. Table 20: Site to be potentially re-allocated for alternative uses (Option B) Site ref Site Name

Area (ha)

30 Askern Industrial Estate, Askern. 2.8751 Poultry Packing Station, Briars Lane, Stainforth. 2.2153 Depot Site, Moss Terrace, Moorends. 1.0354 Adj. The Dutchman, Moorends Rd, Moorends. 1.3957 Off York Road, Scawthorpe 2.7960 Wheatley park, Wheatley Hall Rd, Doncaster. 8.9662 Doncaster Motor Spares Garage Site, Toll Bar. 1.7964 Depot Site/Jewsons, Barnsley Road, Doncaster. 1.8565 Works Site (2), Watch House Lane, Bentley. 1.6075 Works Site, Bawtry Rd, Finningley. 1.0784 Sewage Pumping Station, Pastures Rd, Mexboro. 0.7885 Barton lane, Armthorpe. 5.24

104 Leisure Park, Bawtry Road, Doncaster. 44.69121 East of Bentley Road, Bentley. 4.50140 Council Depot, Oaklands Terrace, Edlington. 1.30

66

145 Pastures Road South, Mexborough. 8.92160 Granby Club and adjacent site, Edlington. 1.62162 Askern Allotments, Askern. 1.70

94.31 Table 21 below shows those existing sites which are considered to be potentially suitable for mixed use development i.e. Option E. These sites would include an element of employment within the site but would also contain a use such as residential or retail. In total the site area is 134.02 hectares.

Table 21: Sites potentially suitable for mixed use development (Option E)

Site ref Site Name

Area (ha)

36 Cultural and Civic Quarter, Town Centre, Doncaster. 22.27

37 St Sepulchre Gate West, Doncaster. 12.2758 Off Jossey Lane, Scawthorpe. 7.3570 3 Horse Shoes, Adj. North Bridge Roundabout. 1.1176 Works Site, Adjacent Rail Station, Mexborough. 1.6596 Chappell Drive, Doncaster. 13.3098 Marshgate 1, Doncaster. 13.23

119 Wheatley Hall Road 3, Wheatley. 55.53

122 Doncaster Industry Park, Watch House Lane, Bentley. 7.31

134.02 8.8.2 Potential Sites

Those potential sites, in this case existing employment sites but currently undeveloped, which are considered suitable to be retained as employment sites, are listed below in Table 22. The sites total 134.10 hectares. Table 22: Site to be retained as an employment allocation (Option A) Site Ref Site Name

Area (hectares)

5 Quarry Site, Mosham Rd, Blaxton. 5.1623 Ringways Garage, York Rd, Scawthorpe. 1.1229 East of Selby Road, Selby Rd, Askern. 2.8134 Bombardier, Hexthorpe. 1.32

107 Airport Business Park 1, RHADS. 27.45115 Bentley Moor Lane, Adwick Le Street. 52.09120 Hungerhill, Edenthorpe. 28.83

123 Askern Saw Mills, Askern. 15.32

134.10

Table 23 below shows those potential (i.e. existing but undeveloped sites) which could be re-allocated for alternative uses i.e. Option B. These sites include those which have scored poorly through the site assessment criteria and those which have been developed during the period of the UDP for uses other than employment e.g. St Oswalds in Kirk Sandall. Which alternative uses each site could be re-allocated to has not been considered at this time and is not the subject of this ELR. The alternative use will depend upon the individual site and its circumstances but may include countryside policy area and residential.

67

Table 23: Site to be potentially re-allocated for alternative uses (Option B) Site Ref Site Name

Area (hectares)

24 New Road, Norton. 0.4326 Ings Road, Bentley. 0.58

100 Balby Carr South, Balby Carr, Doncaster. 62.89

112 Power Station Site, Doncaster Rd, Mexborough. 8.74146 St Oswalds, Kirk Sandall. 3.57

76.21

Table 24 below highlights those potential sites (i.e. representations made to the LDF process) which are considered at this time to be potentially suitable as employment sites and therefore could be allocated in the Allocations DPD. Each site is subject to further assessment on a variety of issues including flood risk and need as set out in paragraph 7.12 above. Table 24: Site potentially suitable as an employment allocation subject to further issues (Option C)

Site Ref Site Name

Area (hectares)

1 Junction 6 North, Thorne. 70.40

2 Bradholme, Thorne. 80.094 Westmoor Park Extension, Armthorpe. 50.49

6 West of Hurst Lane, Finningley. 12.15

7 Hayfield Lane, Finningley. 3.35

8 Loxley park, RHADS. 143.41

10 Inland Port, Rossington. 196.6612 Adjacent to rail line, Adwick Le Street. 24.2516 Redhouse Lane, Adwick Le Street. 80.39

21 Site adjacent Hill Top Road, Denaby. 11.0335 Tudworth Hall Farm, Thorne. 92.7138 Thorne Colliery, Thorne. 128.98

46 Sewage Works, Woodfield Rd, Balby. 8.8748 Armthorpe Concept Masterplan, Armthorpe. 27.2489 Hatfield Triangle, Hatfield. 150.61

91 Powerpark, Hatfield. 114.62134 Carcroft Extension, Adwick Le Street. 33.83152 Site 1 Adj. A614/Junction 6 M18, Thorne. 0.63153 Site 2 Adj. A614/Junction 6 M18, Thorne. 2.78156 North of Westmoor Park, Armthorpe. 74.10159 Airport Business Park Expansion, RHADS. 55.83166 Adjacent Cozen Croft, Armthorpe. 16.94167 Adjacent Shepherd House, Selby Road, Thorne. 3.58173 Ferry Road 1, Selby Road, Thorne. 0.58174 Ferry Road 2, Selby Road, Thorne. 0.70

1384.22

68

The following sites in Table 25 have been put forward through the LDF process but are not considered suitable as employment sites. Many of these sites will have scored poorly in the Site Assessment Methodology and/or will be in an isolated location.

Table 25: Site not considered suitable as an employment use (Option D)

Site Ref Site Name

Area (hectares)

3 Bank End Quarry, Finningley. 55.03

9 Foxhills Farm, A614, Austerfield. 1.4411 Redhouse 2, Great North Road, Woodlands. 0.6013 Site adj. Old Mill Field, Hatfield Woodhouse. 2.1415 Thorpe Marsh Power Station, Barnby Dun. 98.7517 Brodsworth Quarry, Pickburn Leys, Adj Highfields. 60.7118 Site off Hurst Lane, S.West Auckley. 15.3919 South of Rail Line, East of Finningley. 11.3722 Off High Common Lane, Tickhill. 8.1140 The Park, Adwick Le Street. 3.0041 Site adjacent Adwick Station, Adwick Le Street. 17.46

42 Site adjacent J37 A1M, Marr Bridges. 66.5943 Site East of J37 A1M, Marr Bridges. 49.1344 Caravan Park, Tates Wood, Austerfield. 7.0845 Tudor Rose, Kirton lane, Stainforth. 0.7047 Sewage Works, Denaby Lane, Denaby. 2.9549 Common Road, Norton. 20.9592 Holme Wood Farm 1, East of M18, Armthorpe. 103.0793 Holme Wood Farm 2, East of M18, Armthorpe. 92.58

154 Rossington Bridge Farm, Adj. Hare and Tortoise A638 Doncaster. 6.13

155 Westfield Farm, Nutwell Lane Armthorpe. 64.69157 Ducker Holt, A1/A638 Marr. 46.41158 Higgins Farm, off A614 Finningley. 45.90164 Bankwood East, Rossington. 5.50165 Bankwood North, Rossington. 12.11168 Armthorpe South, Armthorpe. 78.18169 Thorne Road, Hatfield. 4.56170 Redhouse Island 1, Adwick Le Street. 0.72171 Redhouse Island 2, Adwick Le Street. 1.93172 Redhouse Island 3, Adwick Le Street. 0.48175 Croft Road, Finningley. 4.66176 Croft Road 2, Finningley. 0.70177 Croft Road 3, Finningley. 9.75178 Mosham Road, Blaxton. 14.53

913.30

Table 26 below shows those potential sites which are considered to be potentially suitable for mixed use development i.e. Option E. These sites would include an element of employment within the site but would also contain a use such as residential or retail. In total the site area is 102.58 hectares.

69

Table 26: Sites potentially suitable for mixed use development (Option E) Site Ref Site Name

Area (hectares)

20 South of Canal adj. Earth Centre, Mexborough. 33.1427 Pastures Road, Mexborough. 16.9228 Former Pit Tip, Broomhouse Lane, Edlington. 17.1297 Waterfront, Wheatley, Doncaster. 20.41

144 Earth Centre, Conisbrough. 14.99 102.58

8.9 Summary The data included in the tables above is summarised below

Table 27 Summary of key findings

Option Existing Sites - Key Finding No of sitesArea

(hectares)A Site to be retained as an employment allocation 62 1074.57 B Site to be potentially re-allocated for alternative uses 18 94.31 E Site potentially suitable for mixed use development 9 134.02 Sub total 89 1302.90 Potential Sites - Key Finding A Site to be retained as an employment allocation 8 134.10 B Site to be potentially re-allocated for alternative uses 5 76.21

C Site potentially suitable as an employment allocation subject to further issues 25 1384.22

D Site not considered suitable as an employment site 34 913.30 E Site potentially suitable for mixed use development 5 102.58

Sub total 77 2610.41 Total all sites 166 3913.31

The table shows that there is sufficient potential employment land to meet the future needs of the Borough, however, it will be the job of the later stages of the ELR and, importantly the Allocations Development Plan Document, to identify the sites that can be brought forward as designations as allocated employment sites.

APPENDIX A

70

Assessment Criteria for Employment Sites Final Version Feb 2008 (E = existing sites, P = proposed sites/existing/undeveloped, B =both) Type

of site Type of development

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA SCORING CRITERION EXPLANATION E/P/B B1 B2 B8 POLICY ISSUES

Town Centres = 5 points Edge of centres = 4 points Urban areas = 3 points

P1a) Settlement Category Offices (B1)

Out of urban areas = 1 point

Large scale office developments are preferred in Doncaster Town Centre. Smaller office developments are scored as suitable in town centres taking account of scale. Scores are lowered according to the sequential test in PPS6

B Y

Doncaster Main Urban Area, Principal Towns, Potential Growth Towns, Renewal Towns = 5 points Conservation Towns = 2 points

P1b) B2 Employment uses

Rural Villages = 0 points

In view of amenity and available space issues, B2 employment sites are assessed on whether they are located within or adjacent to settlements

B Y

Within or adjacent to Doncaster Main Urban Area, Principal Towns, Potential Growth Towns, Renewal Towns = 5 points Near to Doncaster Main Urban Area, Principal Towns, Potential Growth Towns, Renewal Towns with public transport links available = 3 points Conservation Towns = 0 points

P1c) For logistics/warehouse type development (B8)

Rural Villages = 0 points

In view of the space and impact requirements of logistics/warehouse units, B8 sites are assessed on whether they are located within or adjacent to settlements

P Y

Non Green belt = 5 points P2) Green Belt Green belt = 1 point

Green belt allocation as classified in the Doncaster Unitary Development Plan

P Y Y Y

Consistent = 5 points Partially consistent = 3 points

P3) Regional Spatial Strategy

Not consistent = 0 point

How consistent is the site with the Regional Spatial Strategy? The relevant policies include: SY1, E1, E2 and E3

B Y Y Y

Yes = 5 points Partially = 3 points

P4) Doncaster Economic Strategy

No = 0 point

Does the site meet with the Doncaster Economic Strategy objectives?

B Y Y Y

P5) Provides additional Provision of major benefits = 5 points Do schemes provide additional specific planning B Y Y Y

APPENDIX A

71

Some benefits = 3 points benefits No benefits = 0 points

benefits which will add to the well being of the Borough? E.g. brings a derelict site into use; improvement to highway network over and above those needed to serve the site; clear regeneration benefits etc

Policy Score (PS) PS = (P1a or b or c + P2+P3+P4+P5)/5 ACCESS

Within or adjacent to deprived communities = 5 points Moderate access to deprived communities = 3 points

A1) Access to jobs

Isolated from deprived community = 1 point

Can residents from deprived areas access the jobs created on the site? Deprived areas are: areas ranked in the top 20% most deprived in England and Wales of the Employment domain of the Indices of Multiple Deprivation (2004).

B Y Y Y

Whole Borough population accessible within 30 minutes = 5 points 2/3rd of Borough’s population accessible within 30 minutes = 3 points

A2) Access by public transport

1/3rd of Borough’s population accessible within 30 minutes = 1 point

Measures the site’s sustainable accessibility. To be scored against population within 30 minute public transport travel times using the SYPTE Accession Model

B Y Y Y

Good – direct access to inter-modal facilities = 5 points Average – indirect access (inter-modal facilities are close by the site) = 3 points

A3) Strategic Access – inter-modal freight facilities

Poor – single mode access only = 0 points

Identifies of the site can be served by a variety of transport modes other than car and lorry thus enhancing its market appeal (proximity to rail/air/canal)

B Y Y

No significant local access improvements = 5 points Some improvements needed not at a significant cost = 3 points

A4) Local access

Constrained at a high cost = 0 points

Does the site require any local road infrastructure improvements to access it e.g. link road, bridge? Is grant funding or other development required to contribute to the necessary infrastructure costs?

P Y Y Y

Good direct access to sustainable transport (canal/rail) = 5 points Average indirect access (canal or rail facilities close to the site) = 3 points

A5) Strategic Freight Access (sustainable transport modes)

Poor access only by car or air

Can the site be served by more sustainable means resulting in the potential to address air quality and climate change issues

B Y Y Y

Excellent – with immediate access to SHN = 5 points

A6) Strategic Access - road

Good – near to SHN = 3 points

Measures ease of access from site to strategic highway network (SHN) – ‘A’ roads and motorways

B Y

APPENDIX A

72

Poor – limited access to SHN Access Score (AS) AS = (A1+A2+A3+A4+A5+A6)/6 ENVIRONMENTAL HERITAGE AND RESOURCE

Brownfield = 5 points Mix = 2, 3 or 4 points depending on mix

E1) Greenfield or brownfield

Greenfield = 0 points

Gives preference to brownfield development (RSS policy YH8). Data validated on site visits

P Y Y Y

Beyond 3km from site boundary = 5 points

Not adjacent and up to 3km from boundary = 3 points

E2) Special Protection Areas (SPA’s)/Special Areas of Conservation (SACs)

Significant impacts = 0 points

Measures impact on those areas covered by the EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds and the Habitats Directive

P Y Y Y

Over 1 km = 5 points Within 1 km = 3 points Adjacent to SSSI = 1 point

E3) Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)

Within SSSI = site not suitable

Measures impact on Sites of Special Scientific Interest

P Y Y Y

Within 300m = 5 points Within 200m = 3 points

E4) Sites of Scientific Interest (SSI)

Adjacent = 1 point

Measures impact on Sites of Scientific Interest P Y Y Y

High = 5 points Moderate = 3 points Low = 1 point

E5) Landscape capacity

Urban Area = 5 points

Measures impact on landscape using Landscape Capacity Study

P Y Y Y

Non-agricultural land = 5 points Grades 5 – 4 = 3 points Grade 3 = 2 points

E6) Agricultural land quality

Grade 1 – 2 = 0 points

Seeks to avoid development of higher graded agricultural land where non-urban land is used. Scoring will take account of % of graded land within site. Based on MAFF Classification.

P Y Y Y

E7) Biodiversity See additional notes below on how to score Seeks to protect bio-diversity features: tress, hedgerows and so forth

P Y Y Y

Absence of features on site = 5 points E8) Heritage Features

Features on site = 0 points

Seeks to protect listed buildings, Conservation Areas, Ancient Monuments and so forth

P Y Y Y

Within existing urban locations = 5 points E9) Aquifer protection Located on coal measures or clay (drift geology) = 5 points

This measure prefers sites that limit possible risk to the groundwater aquifer

P Y Y Y

APPENDIX A

73

Sand or limestone solid geology = 3 points Source protection zone = 0 points Previously extracted or coal measures = 5 points Soft sand = 3 points

E10) Minerals

Sand and gravel or limestone = 1 point

Seeks to protect recognised mineral reserves P Y Y Y

Environmental Score (ES)

ES = (E1+E2+E3+E4+E5+E6+E7+E8+E9+ E10)/10

MARKETABILITY AND DELIVERABILITY High – local plan representation/high number of enquiries/developers actively involved in the site = 5 points Moderate – significant number of enquiries but no firm proposals

M1) Market activity/developer interest

Low – no substantial interest of any kind = 0 points

a) Existing sites – has the site been actively marketed? Have there been any enquiries regarding the site? b) Potential sites – has there been developer interest e.g. pre-application discussion, a representation to the development plan

B Y Y Y

No constraints = 5 points Some constraints – some land assembly issues e.g. multiple ownership and leasehold = 3 points

M2) Ownership constraints

Very constrained – complicated ownership and land assembly issues = 0 points

Information to be taken Invest in Doncaster Team knowledge and records

B Y Y Y

Excellent – attractive site, ample parking, excellent landscaping, services, roads and buildings = 5 points Good – good quality site, good level of parking, landscaping, services, roads and buildings = 4 points Fair – adequate site with adequate level of parking, landscaping, services, roads and buildings = 3 points Poor – limited parking, landscaping, services, roads and buildings = 2 points

M3) Quality of existing site layout/buildings

Very poor – no parking, poor landscaping, services, road and buildings = 0 points

Information taken from site visits and Invest in Doncaster team knowledge

E Y Y Y

M4) Compatibility with neighbouring uses

No neighbour issues. No residential uses or adjacent areas likely to b affected by noise, dust or other pollution = 5 points

Perception of the wider environmental quality. Do the adjacent land uses constrain development of o the quality of the uses on the

B

Y

Y

Y

APPENDIX A

74

An average risk of neighbour issues. Some potential neighbour problems from uses on either side = 3 points Serous neighbour problems. Potential pollution problems. Residential/town centre uses in all sides of the boundary = 0 points

site? Data validated on site visits

No constraints – flat topography and regular shape Moderate constraints which limit layout – relatively flat topography and shape = 3 points

M5) Topography, size and shape

Major constraints – undulating topography and irregular shape = 0 points

Measures suitability of site to accommodate proposed employment use. Appraised using GIS and site visit data

P Y Y Y

Marketability Score (MS) MS = (M1+M2+M3+M4+M5)/5 Overall Sustainability Score

PS+AS+ES+MS Composite sustainability score based on all criteria

APPENDIX A

75

Site Assessment Methodology – Additional Notes P1(a) Settlement Category

This criterion examines the location of the sites. Method: GIS desktop assessment using overlay methods. Employment sites assessed and scored based on geographic proximity to i) centres as listed in the Core Strategy ii) Urban areas (as defined by ONS) iii) Town Centre.

P1(b) GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Employment sites rated and scored based on geographic proximity to settlements as defined in the Core Strategy settlement hierarchy classifications.

P1(c) As P1 (b), but, for Proposed sites and existing undeveloped sites only.

P2) Greenbelt GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Sites scored based on proximity to Greenbelt (GB) (as defined by the Doncaster Unitary Development Plan). Majority of sites are not in the GB and some are wholly within. Some sites overlap into the GB and an assessment has been made as to whether this overlap is significant enough to shift the site rating from none GB (5 points) to being within the GB (1 point).

P3) Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS)

Compliance with RSS To ascertain consistency with the RSS key spatial policy objectives were identified. As the applicability varied for B1/B2 and B8 employment uses, they were applied separately to each sector. This is a variation from the agreed Employment Site Criteria but enabled for more effective scoring. The key tests with their policy reference are those identified in the table below which shows how they apply to each sector. The RSS supports Robin Hood Airport as a Regionally Significant Investment Priority which supports development in accord with PPG13 (air related uses). Therefore sites contiguous to the airport were treated as being consistent with the RSS as “air related” sites. The definition of the urban centre is Doncaster, Thorne and Mexborough which are identified in fig 2.3 of the RSS. Fig 4.2, although not a geographical map base identifies the rough extent of the Doncaster area. Doncaster Council’s position has been to identify a greater range of principal towns but at this stage these other settlements are not taken into account, as this criteria is about the RSS consistency. Scoring in other criteria takes account of the LDF approach. To arrive at the scores some interpretation is required. Some comments are provided as a guide to the scoring but it is not possible to fully describe the derivation of the score. An example if where there are strategic sites that serve the urban area but which may not be adjacent a main town. Also the scale of site need to be considered against the settlement it is located in, e.g. smaller sites in smaller towns are considered consistent. Also, it is noted that B1 sites included offices which are town centre uses. The RSS requires that town centres should be the focus for office development therefore B1 sites were considered consistent if located within urban areas.

APPENDIX A

76

P4) Economic Strategy

Does the site meet with the objectives of the Doncaster Economic Strategy? The Doncaster Economic Strategy was adopted in March 2008. The purpose of the economic strategy is to enhance economic growth by support local business growth and attracting new businesses to the Borough. It seeks to make Doncaster an attractive destination for business and ensure that its residents particularly in deprived communities are able to benefit from resulting job opportunities. These purposes are translated into 9 themes and 4 cross cutting measures and these are used to assess how the various sites meet the Economic Strategy. Not all themes were directly to employment land matters. The key themes used in the assessment were: Theme 1: Stimulating Technology – are the sites in locations that would attract investment in technology? Theme 3: Exploiting Robin Hood’s Growth and Doncaster’s Exceptional Communications – are the sites connected to the business growth of the airport or have the potential for logistics uses? Theme 4: Repositioning Doncaster – is the site’s development likely to stimulate a “landmark” developments that will contribute to a more positive image of Doncaster? Theme 5: Fostering a Dynamic Urban Core and a comprehensive property portfolio – will the sites contribute to an urban renaissance and a range of employment sites (including small start up sites, managed workspace, strategic sites)? Theme 6: Supporting Economic Diversification – will the sites support inward investment in new sectors in particular the key growth areas of logistics, CDI, financial and business services, events and visitor economy? Theme 7: Supporting social regeneration and worklessness – are sites located near to areas of deprivation? There are 4 cross cutting themes;

1. Achievement of environmental sustainability – will the sites have impacts that likely to be widely considered by stakeholders as unacceptable?

2. Quality of life and quality neighbourhoods – will the projects have impacts that are likely to have damaging impacts on neighbourhoods and quality of life ?

3. Economic inclusion - will the sites support inclusion? This is similar to Theme 7

4. Delivery Capacity (through partnership structures) – this seeks to build partnerships. As the LDF looks ahead to 2026, time is available to develop appropriate delivery partnerships. However, where there are controversial plans, it may be that consensus cannot be reached and efficient delivery impeded?

APPENDIX A

77

Sites that fully supported these themes were scored as meeting the objectives and received a score of 5 – it is not possible to meet all of them as some are incompatible e.g. logistics sites could not be expected to directly support a dynamic urban core. An intermediate score of 3 was given if the site was not maximising its contribution to the themes e.g. a site may be suitable for logistics but not located near to areas of worklessness. Scores were also reduced if there was inconsistency with one of the cross cutting themes e.g. a large site is proposed where there would be no partnership support i.e. a scheme is extremely controversial. Theme 7 was a key criterion in that schemes were scored lower if whilst they offered regeneration they were not near areas of job need.

P5) Provide Additional Benefits

Sites were scored if as part of their known proposals they were likely to include significant benefits beyond there own inherent development. There were not many additional benefits identified but were mostly related to provision of infrastructure that would have a wider public benefit e.g. FARRRS, White Rose Way. Also, sites scored if highly derelict areas were being brought into productive use.

A1) Access to jobs

This criterion records the proximity of sites to employment deprived areas. Method: GIS desktop assessment using GIS overlay methods. Sites rated and scored based on proximity to deprived communities (as defined by Super Output Areas (SOA) ranked in the top 20% most deprived of Employment domain of the Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007). Proximity is defined as (a) Within or adjacent (b) moderate – between ½ and 1 mile (c) Isolated – more than 1 mile.

A2) Access by Public Transport

This criterion measures how many people of working age can access the site via public transport within 30 minutes travel time. Method: GIS desktop assessment. Sites rated and scored based on the number of resident working age population (at SOA level census 2001) within 30 minutes public transport time. Travel time data provided by SYPTE. Number of people is expressed as a percentage of the overall Doncaster working age population.

A3) Strategic Access – Intermodal Freight Facilities

This criterion was a measure of the potential for a site to be served by more than one mode. This is considered a beneficial as it provide flexibility and adaptability in the longer term to survive changes in transport costs and enables freight to be switched from one mode to another to support freight transport efficiency. Sites were scored highly if they were could be effectively served by two or more transport modes. For example an adjacent railway line would not contribute if it was on a high embankment running adjacent to the site. Site scored 0 if they could only be accessed by one transport mode. If inter-modal transport facilities were near by e.g. airport, rail port, additional scoring was given. The scoring was checked by the Council’s Strategic Transport Team (see notes below this table).

A4) Local Access

This criterion was scored by assessing sites against their position on the local transport network. Sites that were adjacent or near to main roads would score more highly whereas sites having to be accessed on significant lengths of local road, and therefore would have high impacts on the areas that those roads passed through or would require improvements, scored less. Sites scored less where traffic generated by sites was likely to pass through known areas of traffic constraints or congestion. The exercise was generic as any scheme if brought to the development stage would still need a traffic impact assessment (TIA) and the scoring is not intended to impact on the outcomes of the TIA.

APPENDIX A

78

The scoring was checked by the Council’s Strategic Transport Team.

A5) Strategic Freight Access (Sustainable Transport Modes)

This sought to measure if the site could be served by transport modes that were “environmentally friendly”. Site that could be directly served by railway or canal scored highly. If access to these facilities was near by which would include an intermediate journey, then sites were scored more lowly. Site still scored a point if they could be accessed by road or air, as over time, these modes will still reduce their emission levels. The scoring was checked by the Council’s Strategic Transport Team.

A6) Strategic Access – Road

Overall sites will still need to be served by road as it is the main mode of freight transport. Sites were therefore scored by their proximity to the strategic highway network. Direct access to motorway junctions or A roads received the highest scoring. Where sites were near to these, using for example B roads, scores were reduced. Sites scored “0” where access requires the use of local roads to access the Strategic Highway Network. The scoring was checked by the Council’s Strategic Transport Team.

APPENDIX A

79

E1) Greenfield or brownfield

GIS desktop assessment. Sites assessed and scored based on previous use. Only one site was found to be split i.e. part greenfield and part brownfield. The % split was recorded and site scored accordingly.

E2) Special Protection Areas (SPA)/Special Areas of Conservation (SAC)

GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Sites scored based on proximity to SPA and SAC boundaries (data set supplied by English Nature).

E3) Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)

GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Sites scored based on proximity to SSSI boundaries (data set supplied by English Nature).

E4) Sites of Scientific Interest (SSI)

GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Sites scored based on proximity to SSI boundaries (data set used: UDP Sites of Regional/Local Importance for Nature Conservation).

E5) Landscape capacity

GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Sites compared to data from Doncaster Landscape Character Capacity Study (ECUS 2006). Further more detailed site appraisal work has been undertaken for the ‘Landscape Character Capacity Study (Golder Associates, Sept 2009). This study looks at a selection of sites in greater detail and includes mitigation measures for employment development. The findings of this study will be considered in the employment land allocations stage of the LDF. The Landscape Character Capacity Study (2009) is available to view and download from www.doncaster.gov.uk.

E6) Agricultural land quality

GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Sites compared to data from Agricultural Land Classification (based on MAFF classifications).

E7) Biodiversity features

Q1 Is the site brownfield land which has been cleared in the last 6 months? If Yes = No effect (Score 5) If No = Go to Q2 Q2 Is the site Amenity Grassland, Intensive Farmland or brownfield land which has not been recently cleared? If Yes = Go to Q2a If No = Go to Q3 Q2a Are any possible biodiversity features only around the edge of the site (excluding the access) (e.g. trees, hedges, water)? If Yes = Possible Mitigation (Score 4) If No = Go to Q2b Q2b Do any possible biodiversity features cover more than 25% of the site? If Yes = Cannot Mitigate (Score 3) If No = Go to Q2c Q2c Do any possible biodiversity features include linear features crossing the site (e.g. hedges and ditches)? If Yes = Cannot Mitigate (Score 3) If No = Possible Mitigation (Score 4) Q3 Is the site semi-natural habitat (including non-intensive farmland such as around Fishlake and woodland) – indicative features would be the presence of drains, hedges, trees etc If Yes = Possible ‘Major Effect’ (so Score of 1 or 2 depending on Mitigation) If No = Check with Environmental Planning

APPENDIX A

80

Q3a Are any possible biodiversity features only around the edge of the site (excluding the access)? If Yes = Possible Mitigation (Score 2) If No = Go to Q3b Q3b Do any possible biodiversity features cover more than 25% of the site? If Yes = Cannot Mitigate (Score 0) If No = Go to Q3c Q3c Do any possible biodiversity features include linear features crossing the site (e.g. hedges and ditches)? If Yes = Cannot Mitigate (Score 0) If No = Possible Mitigation (Score 2) Important note: The desktop assessment established the presence of landscape features of biodiversity interest within individual sites (e.g. woodland, ponds, drains, trees and hedgerows), but did not have the capacity to identify the character and quality of open areas of grassland. Therefore these habitats have not been taken into account as part of this preliminary environmental scoping, but remain a key consideration.

E8) Heritage sites

GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Employment sites assessed (Proposed sites only) against proximity to: Listed Buildings, Historic Parks and Gardens, Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Conservation Areas. (Heritage feature datasets all from Adopted UDP). At this stage it was agreed that effects and mitigation could not be assessed so therefore the criteria was adjusted to only record whether a site had any heritage features (as listed above) within its boundary. The scoring was adjusted to reflect this i.e. No effect = 5 points, Some effect = 0 points. As the scoring reveals very few proposed sites are in fact in proximity with any known heritage features.

E9) Aquifer protection

GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Sites compared to: Drift geology and Solid geology. Source: British Geological Survey.

E10) Minerals GIS desktop assessment. Method: GIS overlay. Sites compared to: Solid geology, Drift geology, Solid geology and Concreting layer. Source: British Geological Survey.

M1) Market activity/developer interest

Desktop assessment workshop. Sites evaluated by Economic Development Team using local knowledge and reference to the Enquiries database. Representations for sites also considered. Scoring also evaluated at ‘Stakeholder Workshop’ and comments and suggested amendments noted.

M2) Ownership constraints

Desktop assessment workshop. Sites evaluated by Economic Development Team and Employment Planning Policy Team using local knowledge. Reference also made to GIS data including Ordnance survey mapping and aerial photography. Site visit evaluation undertaken and evidence collected also considered (data sheet and site photos). Scoring also evaluated at ‘Stakeholder Workshop’ and comments and suggested amendments noted.

M3) Quality of existing site layout/buildings

Desktop assessment workshop. Sites evaluated by Economic Development Team and Employment Planning Policy Team using local knowledge. Reference also made to GIS data including Ordnance survey mapping and aerial photography. Site visit evaluation undertaken and evidence collected also considered (data sheet and site photos). Scoring also evaluated at ‘Stakeholder Workshop’ and comments and suggested amendments noted.

APPENDIX A

81

M4) Compatibility With Neighbouring Uses

Sites were assessed principally on their impact on neighbouring residential areas. This took account of possible problems arsing from such impacts as noise, views, traffic disturbance and light pollution. The scoring took account of the closeness to neighbouring areas, their scale and how much they surrounded impacted areas. This was a general approach as planning mitigation could be put in place or some users (B1) may have less impact than others. The scoring was also sensitive to the P1 scores where the scores could potentially cancel out each other. Because of this the sites were scored separately for B1, B2 and B8 uses and particular attention given to the scale of development which would determine its overall impact.

M5) Topography and Shape

The site sought to measure the efficiency of a site to accommodate development. A key matter was topography and features that might incur layout penalties such as drains, pylons. The application of this was subjective as the assessment had to take account of likely development type – e.g. large sites near the motorway would be likely to have to accommodate large distribution warehouses requiring large regular shaped sites. Alternative sites in urban areas suitable for mixed business development would have a less of an impact if accommodating smaller scale developments than a large B8 unit.

APPENDIX B

82

Doncaster Local Development Framework Employment Forecasting Workshop

10.30am to 1.00pm, 10th February 2009 Location: Council House, Doncaster

Notes of discussion Present: Graeme Harrison, Oxford Economics, Lead Consultant Jeremy Johnson, DMBC Employment Planning Manager Richard Dobson, DMBC Employment Planning Team Chris Dungworth, DMBC Investment Team Manager Allan Wiltshire, DMBC Performance and Partnerships John Pilgrim, Yorkshire Forward Stuart Kielty, Yorkshire Forward Dave Hazard, DMBC 3D Manager Rob Murfin, Yorkshire and Humber Assembly Amy Harhoff, DMBC Strategic Transport Team Circulated previously: OEF Draft Report Exec Summary and Schedule of policy on projects. Jeremy Johnson explained the purpose of the workshop was to share work undertaken by Oxford Economic Forecasting, which would be used to inform the Core Strategy land quantum’s and provide an opportunity for response to the work, assumptions and conclusions. The workshop received a presentation from Graeme Harrison on the methodology and outputs of the modelling work of the three scenarios. Key issues to arise out of the presentation and discussion arising; Economic Outlooks – these were constantly changing and economic models were now being updated more regularly. The base date of the Doncaster work was last December and recorded a 0.1% decline in the economy over the first two years of the projection whereas the currently used figure was more likely to be –2.9%. It was possibly the worst time to calculate forecasts as we were in the “eye of a storm” – even 6 months later would provide a clearer picture. However, migration and house values could be included and there was still value as long terms trends (the focus of these projections) could still offer useful insight and project growth. Effectively the issue is not so much about quantity but when and at what point positive growth level would return. Most of the risks were on the down side however there were some trends not yet feeding into the model: slowdown in manufacturing; shipping costs returning manufacturing to Europe. Doncaster could be well placed if the costs of manufacturing in China rise and manufacturing could make a return. GH said that we have just gone through a 'Golden Era' in the last few years as far as development is concerned and those circumstances will not continue and will probably not return for a number of years. But, scenario 1 still remains the most probable of the three. Regional Compliance – the model was constrained to regional and national growth. However there are issues here as Doncaster sits on the edge of the region Robin Hood Airport will impact on areas outside the region and it was noted that this was an issue with York Science Park. Sectors did have varying levels of commuting.

APPENDIX B

83

Historical Trends – how far do they go back? – sufficient to establish a pattern hence coal mining would not be part of the historical trend. It was also useful to establish shares of regional sectors. Sectors – these often had their own factors which meant they had to be looked at separately. This was relevant to Doncaster which was a good location for strategic warehousing. Similarly, office development in the future would be more development led as new sites become available in Doncaster town centre usurping previous trends. Effects of Recession and relationship with GVA – job numbers and GVA were not always linked resulting from three day working, lack of bonuses. Key Findings – the housing led scenario required 50,000 jobs compared to the baseline figure of 15,000 jobs. The policy on would provide 27,000 jobs which with the indirect jobs of 8,000 would go along way to meeting the housing led forecasts. Nevertheless there was still a shortfall of 9,500 jobs. In this respect Doncaster is fortunate to have the identified potential to provide a substantial number of the housing target jobs Housing Led Forecasts and Jobs Gap – the housing led scenario clearly represented an aspirational scenario. It was noted to include housing growth point bid (to continue throughout the plan period although the region were consulting on higher housing targets proposing specific increased targets) and the eco town proposal. It was thought that these figures already included assumptions including economic growth. There was thus a danger that there might be double counting and continual “stepping up” of the housing and employment figures. Policy On Forecast – projects feeding into this were circulated and were noted to provide a well researched basis for the OEF work (in comparison to other studies). There were no other projects to include in the “policy on” scenario. This scenario included projects that would provide the economic growth that had “fuelled” the higher housing targets set by the region. There was a difficult balance between baseline projects and policy on projects but the report was clear on what the policy on projects were. Use of Forecasts – there was danger that the model outputs could be considered by some to be predictions. The forecast scenarios were clearly explained. The key issue for their use is what do they tell us about the economy in the future and what interventions are required. Some low model outputs were resisted as they implied low status with political pressure for higher outputs. Some key issues for Doncaster arising out of the work were: need for FARRRS; skills modelling; assessing impacts of University status. A key issue for employment land use planning is how do we avoid over-allocation based on poor land supply. Planning authorities needed to bring forward quality sites attractive to the market that would support housing targets. The RSS was positive towards existing sites being reallocated and bringing forward new quality sites. Yorkshire Cities Work on Recessional Impacts (Lee Tillman) – this work was commissioned in May and looks at resilience and recession scenario based on a) mild recession, b)1990’s type recession and c) a serious recession. The message was that Doncaster would be more seriously affected during the recession but would recover more quickly. However, the expected jobs losses of the 1990 recession i.e. 2,500 jobs had already been surpassed. It was thought that short term mitigation may be required to the projects in the Economic Strategy but on the whole the direction being taken is the right one. Discussion took place on the impact of short term effects on long term forecasts. It was agreed that the long term direction was still correct but there was a probability that the “policy on” jobs would be reduced. What mattered most was the direction of the Economic Strategy

APPENDIX B

84

and the quality of land supply to be brought forward i.e. how will it align to the Economic Strategy. It was fundamental to have a variable economy. There was a need to ensure that the housing supply matched the type of jobs coming forward and Doncaster needed to address its skills shortages. Yorkshire Forward Work (Stuart Kielty) YF were looking to develop their work to cover all LAs in the region and develop a more robust “policy on” model. They were also looking into having a more cost effective modelling system for LA to provide reality checking and agree assumptions. The current YF model output for Doncaster was lower than the OEF baseline but not too inconsistent; 9,700 jobs compared to 14,500 jobs. SK explained that the YF model uses a differing methodology from the OEF model and the numbers could be explained by FTE jobs as opposed to total jobs. Further work was being done on the “policy on” position in particular to understand the transformational projects. Yorkshire Forward were to forward on their policy comparative figures to OEF as the OEF report looked at older YF figures. Key Conclusions

• Employment spatial planning needs to be economic policy driven • Modelling scenarios helps understand choices to be made • A key issue for growth is quality of employment land • Recession issues do not affect Doncaster’s long term direction • Doncaster is well placed with transformational projects to meet its housing target

but the delivery of these projects may be delayed. • Yorkshire Forward were supportive of urban renaissance and the office sector in

Doncaster’s centre • Forecast figures needed to be updated and monitored but without threatening

long term direction unless there was a recurring variance Note circulated to workshop attendees 13 Feb 2009 with amendments by 25 Feb. Note compiled by Jeremy Johnson.

APPENDIX C

85

Key demographic data Key Points

1. Doncaster’s economic structure is not especially favourable for future employment growth, despite evident restructuring and recent job increases. It still has high proportions of manufacturing activities which are expected to reduce in scale at the national level. Also, there is a relatively small base in financial and business services from which to expand, combined with a relatively high proportion of people employed in public services. Although this sector has seen a period of recent expansion, this is not expected to provide scope for equivalent growth in the future.

2. Land transport activities (including distribution and other logistics operations) is an

existing strength that has experienced recent growth in the Borough and is likely to show increases in employment in the future. Refuse disposal is also highlighted as being a strong sector which offers scope for expansion in the future. This includes recycling activities which are increasingly encouraged by legislation covering the disposal of consumer products in particular.

3. Doncaster has a relatively low proportion of jobs which occupy business space (B

space), due mainly to the low representation of office based activities, not the industrial and warehousing activities. This reflects the historic production base to the Doncaster economy and office based sectors will increase as a share of total employment in the future.

4. Despite the unfavourable economic structure, Doncaster has performed well in terms

of job growth in recent years, with an increase of some 24,000 jobs between 1995-2005. This rate of increase was better than the national, regional and Sub-Regional averages. Although Doncaster has also outperformed Sheffield, Rotherham has seen a higher rate of employment growth.

5. Employment and economic growth is obviously affected by many more factors that

employment land availability. A key facet to continued growth in Doncaster will be increasing the share of employment in higher skilled occupations, especially in areas such as financial and business services. This will require improvements in the availability of skilled labour – an area where Doncaster remains weak.

6. Although unemployment levels in Doncaster have improved dramatically over the

past decade, the rates in the Borough remain high compared to the national and regional levels, but also in comparison to its neighbouring areas.

7. A high proportion of residents of Doncaster travel to work using a bus compared to

the national average, but a higher proportion also travel to work by car, reflecting the relatively small numbers commuting by train and tram.

Extract taken from: Appendix One, Roger Tym and Partners – Employment Land Study (Dec 2008)

APPENDIX D

86

Doncaster SWOT analysis Strengths Weaknesses

• Rail and motorway connections with rest of the UK

• Enhanced public transport accessibility (i.e. Interchange and QBCs)

• Powerful growth pole as a UK logistics interchange

• RHADS as a rapidly expanding new international airport

• Strong levels of office take-up given the size of the market

• Relatively advanced level of out-of-town office provision

• Lack of Higher Education Institution • Low skilled workforce and less

knowledge intensive than comparator cities

• Low proportion of modern town centre office stock

• Stronger commuting outflows than inflows

• Recent growth in FBS employment weak relative to other Boroughs in South Yorkshire

• Weakest office employment growth forecast of the South Yorkshire Boroughs

Opportunities Threats

• Significant short term office development pipeline

• Favourable forecasts for economic growth to 2001

• Town centre renaissance, significant office development planned for St Sepulchre Gate West

• RHADS expansion of airport business park

• Labour supply

• Economic and Property market

slowdown, threatening investment and development

• Future land supply • Ending Objective One gap funding

assistance • Phasing of development and

potential oversupply • Cessation of Empty Property Rate

Relief

Extract taken from: South Yorkshire Office Market Report 2008 (Table 12) Prepared by Knight Frank on behalf of Renaissance South Yorkshire (April 2008)

APPENDIX E

87

M18 Corridor Strategic Transport Framework Agreement

Introduction In 2006, a “strategic framework agreement” started to be developed with dialogue between DMBC, the Highways Agency (HA) and developers along the M18 corridor in order to prepare an interim planning position to facilitate developments in advance of formal endorsement of the Local Development Framework Core Strategy in 2010. Transport modelling work undertaken by Faber Maunsell on behalf of DMBC has identified that capacity constraints along the M18 corridor would currently restrict development and regeneration potential. To overcome this, the strategic framework is considered an appropriate mechanism to facilitate developer contributions towards improvements on the M18. Workshops Two workshops have been undertaken to inform developers and their consultants of the work being undertaken by DMBC and their consultants to assess the future capacity of the M18 in partnership with the HA. Current and potential major developments along the M18 corridor have been represented at the workshops through their planning and transport consultants. Discussions were held at the inaugural workshop to consider the feasibility of developing a strategic framework based on the following guiding principles:

• It had to be equitable; • It had to be consistently applied to all developments; • It had to conform with the HA’s strategic objectives; • It had to be based on a consistent measurable approach.

The workshop agreed in principle that the strategic framework was appropriate to lever in contributions towards improvements on the M18 and the most appropriate basis would be trips generated from individual developments. The focus of the M18 improvements would be on junction 5 and widening between junctions 2 and 3, which would underpin the framework. In addition, the existing Section 106 contributions methodology would support other local improvements necessitated by developments being brought forward. The second workshop was held to inform all partners on the Council’s latest planning position relating to employment sites, and to detail how the strategic framework process will enable development sites along the M18 corridor to be brought forward. Developer contribution methodology A methodology to enable an equitable funding mechanism for apportioning/obtaining developer contributions towards proposed strategic network improvements on the M18, particularly between junctions 2 and 3 and the upgrade of junction 5 was developed in conjunction with this work. Under this model developers are required to contribute towards the construction cost of network improvements at junctions 2, 3 and 5 of the M18. This contribution is proportional to the trips generated by their development. The network is split in to the following links to provide a simplified method of assigning trips:

• Section A: M18 J2 - J3 • Section C: J5 South • Section D: J5 North • Section E: J5 West

Under this model, developers are required to contribute towards the proportion of trips their developments generate on the M18 over and above normal background growth. The methodology takes AADT flows from the CUBE model, and subtracts base year (2005) flows from future year flows (2026) to provide a total difference in trips (DiT). The trips attributed to

APPENDIX E

88

each of the developments identified in the spreadsheet are totalled to provide a number for Total Developer Trips (TDT). Total Overall Trips (TOT) are then calculated by combining DiT and TDT. Each individual development’s trips are the input for each link to calculate the proportion against TOT. This proportion is then multiplied by the construction cost of each link to provide the appropriate level of contribution. Transport Modelling – Overview The transport modelling work was undertaken to examine the impacts of the known committed developments and proposed future developments in the south of Doncaster on the M18, and provide an informed view as to the level of interventions required to facilitate this growth. This work began in 2006 and has been carried out on a phased approach. This began using Doncaster Council’s strategic multi modal transport model Cube (DMMM) to provide demand flows which were inputted into the Highways Agency’s VISSIM micro simulation model traffic model to assess the impact this would have on the M18. In 2007 the Council’s Cube model was expanded and updated using the development re-forecasting based on the latest LDF proposals. The final element of this work utilised the expanded model (DMMME) to provide the demand flows for VISSIM modelling to inform a Regional Funding Allocation (RFA) submission. Transport Modelling – Phased Approach The approach has been as follows:

• Using the Council’s Cube Voyager strategic transport model (Mouchel Parkman) and the Highway Agency’s Vissim micro simulation model of the M18 (Faber Maunsell), developments along the M18 corridor were tested with the HA’s approval.

• Faber Maunsell was commissioned to assess a number of large development sites around the south and east of Doncaster and the impact they will have on the strategic road network.

• Work began on assessing the impact of development in the M18 corridor in 2006. Overall this work has been undertaken in four phases.

• Phase 1 was undertaken to assess the impact of FARRRS on the M18 up to 2026. • Phase 2 was undertaken to assess the implications of certain developments at

M18/J5 and adjacent areas with FARRRS in place. • In 2007, Phase 3 was undertaken to consider the six known major development sites

along the M18 corridor. A total of six development sites are considered as part of this study.

• These developments were packaged together into two scenarios. Previous work had tested Scenarios 1 to 4. The tests in this Study were labelled Scenario 5 and 6 included all developments while Scenario 6 included all except Stainforth Gate Logistics Park.

• The Scenario Schedule is:

• The Cube Voyager model was used to provide an estimate of traffic growth between

2005 and 2026 (the design year). The change in flows between 2005 and the revised 2026 was then applied to the 2005 Vissim model thus bringing it up to 2026.

Development Type Size Scenario 1

2 3 3

a 4 5 6

Hatfield Power Park Phase 1 B1, B2 / colliery 39,500 m² Hatfield Power Park B1, B2, B8 / colliery 135,634m² Link Road Potential Dev Mixed Mixed Waystone B1, B2, B8 31,500m² Bradholme Farm B8 m² Inland Port B8 m² West Moor Park B2/B8 53 Acres Stainforth Gate B8 with B1/B2 241,540m²

APPENDIX E

89

• The Vissim model was run using the 2026 road network developed for Doncaster

Council in previous studies. This assumes the following schemes will be in place: • FARRRS • Widening of M18 junction 2 to 3 to three lanes • Full White Rose Way improvements • Improvements to junction 2 of M18 • Improvements at junction 5

• Since 2007, the Council’s Cube Voyager model has been expanded and development re-forecasting based on the LDF proposals included.

• Phase 4 was undertaken in 2008 to identify a suitable scheme to be taken forward for RFA. Three version of trip generation information were produced for this work to enable a range of trip levels to be assessed: • Assessment 1 – updated information on development type and scale based on

TRICS version 2008b; • Assessment 2 – additional trip reductions that may arose from agreed Travel Plan

target enforcement; • Assessment 3 – reduced travel arising from the current updated development

Transport Assessment details and discussions with DMBC Planners to determine the likely timescales for sites delivery.

Assessment Outcome At the Regional Transport Board (RTB) meeting on the 23rd January 2009, the following was approved in relation to this work:

• A £10m contribution to upgrading the M18 junction 2 to 3 to respond to existing constraints on the network, which will also assist in enabling the FARRRS link to junction 3.

• A further £40m from the RTB, to enable further, required improvements to the M18 once FARRRS has been delivered. This is a contribution to a scheme, which will require a further £122m in future RFA rounds to deliver a major M18 scheme to support the planned development along the FARRRS corridor and RHADS.

APPENDIX F

90

Policy on project assumptions for economic forecasting

Transformational and Policy On Projects

Floorspace Area (ha)

Jobs potential

Time scale Source of info Notes

Urban Renaissance Sites CCQ and other centre sites e.g. Marshgate

27,311 sq.m. 4.7 2014 - 2026 Planning application. Interpretation of Draft Marshgate Masterplan.

The figures exclude the Council offices.

Waterfront (East and West) 68,000 sq.m. 6.8 2016 - 2030 Floor space based on Waterfront Strategy October 2008 and Doncaster Renaissance Master Plan 2003

St Sepulchre Gate West 34,000 sq. m. 3.3 2014 - 2026 St Sep Gate Action Plan Preferred Options

M18 Sites 2010 - 2026 Westmoor Park Extension 136,000sq.m. of B8 46.5 Planning application 08/2201 10,000 sq.m. of b2 Bradholme 190,500 sq m. of b8 45 Planning application 36,000 sq.m. of B1/2 9 Hatfield Triangle - distribution park

150,000 sq.m. of B8 50 Concept plan

Total M18 Sites 522000 m2 150.5 Other Projects Power Park 35,000sq.ft of offices planning application 04/4512 Figures are “policy on”

and exclude first phase. 50,000sq.ft of B2 1,070,000 sq.ft of B8 26 70,000 sq.ft of

hybrids

Waystone 6.4 planning application 04/4512 Carbon Challenge 330,452 sq.ft. 3.1 2013-2016 planning application Robin Hood Airport; airport 2900-5200 upto 2016 Airport Master Plan airport 3400-6000 2016-2030 Airport Master Plan business park 4400-5000 upto 2016 Airport Master Plan business park 6800-8100 2016-2030 Airport Master Plan Inland Port 5659 2015-2031 Pre-application docs (env

assessment)

APPENDIX G

91

Calculation table for transferring "policy on" scenario forecast figures to site area required Policy on scenario Office

Sector (B1a)

Business and industry sector (B1b,c)

Non strategic warehousing (B8)

Strategic warehousing (B8)

A Number of net jobs required 2008 to

2026 5,600 1,575 438 15,132

A (1) Number of net jobs required for RHADS Masterplan 2008 to 2026

1,641 2,779 0 1,319

A (2) Net number of jobs required 2008 to 2026 (A - A (2))

3,959 -1,204 438 13,814

B Job density multiplier (m2/person) 18 31 50 88

C Floorspace required (m2) to accommodate net change in jobs (A x B)

71,268 -37,326 21,888 1,215,602

D Frictional or "churn" requirement;10% of existing stock, but 5% for strategic b8 (m2)* - data is based on RTP report para 5.15 using 2008 VOA data.

28,000 122,100 2,726 66,787

E Total floorspace (m2), (C + D) 99,268 84,774 24,614 1,282,389

F Plot ratio (%); 40 40 40

G Site area needed to accommodate floorspace m2 (E x F)

211,934 61,535 3,205,973

H Hectares (G/10,000) 10 21 6 321

I Percentage factor to allow for other uses on employment site (%)

25 25 0

J Area required to allow for other uses on employment sites (ha), (H x I)

5 2 0

K Total Hectares (H + J) 26 8 321

L Choice factor as a %** 25 50 50 10

M Area requirement for choice factor (ha), (K x L)

2 13 4 32

L Total site area required (ha), (K + M) 12 40 12 353

m2 124,085

M Total provision for B1b/c,B2 & B8 (Non strategic),

51

Total Hectares required 416

*a lower friction is used for strategic warehouse as there is likely to be less friction and churn in this sector (as there is greater level of direct inward investments). Therefore a 5% factor is used. The floorspace used derives from Valuation Office date used in the RTP report. **The choice factor is reduced for strategic warehousing as strategic warehousing are built to requirement and site locations are similar

APPENDIX H

92

Site Validation Sheet Site reference (from database)_________________ Site name/location_______________________________________________ Surveyor Initials______________ Date__________ Photo numbers____________ Site Area (hectares)_______________ Source______________________(rep, existing (occupied), existing (vacant)) UDP designation_______________________________ Criteria Comment ( as appropriate) Site Status Greenfield

Brownfield Mix _____________________(split)

Topography

Flat Sloping Steep

Regular shape Irregular shape

What are the adjacent uses? (number of boundaries of site)

Residential 1 2 3 4 Employment – type? 1 2 3 4 _________________ Retail 1 2 3 4 Leisure 1 2 3 4 Other? What? 1 2 3 4 ______________________

EXISTING SITES ONLY Quality of existing buildings (general appearance of site)

Excellent Good Fair Poor Very poor How well used is the site?__________________________ ______________________________________________ Any comments?__________________________________ _______________________________________________

EXISTING SITES ONLY Who are the main occupiers?

Any other comments?

APPENDIX I

93

Employment Land Review Technical Group Attendees Mrs Redfern Redfern Development & Investments Ltd Norman Edmanson Business mentor Andrew Gent Gent Visick Simon English Hannah Reed Graham Sadler Kilmartin Property Group Peter Wilson 3D, DMBC Tim Hazeltine Invest in Doncaster, DMBC Jeremy Johnson LDF Employment Team, DMBC Nicola Ward LDF Employment Team, DMBC Richard Dobson LDF Employment Team, DMBC Site Comments

DMBC Emp Site Ref Site Name

Type of

Site Stakeholder Workshop Comments

1 Junction 6 North P Good site - wrong side of M18.

2 Bradholme Farm P Scores agreed.

3 Bank End Quarry P Already a lot of land allocated at Airport. FARRRS will not affect the site.

4 West Moor Park Extension P Good Site.

5 Quarry Site P

Good site but is it better than other sites in the area? Small businesses may find it attractive if airport expands. Site boundaries do not fit with aerial photo. If not allocate then no.

APPENDIX I

94

6 West of Hurst Lane P FARRRS goes straight through. Subject to FARRRS is good site. How would you access the site? Also depends on how much land is being allocated in the area.

7 Hayfield Lane P Good site - has good access. Opposite priority estates - took longer to let/sell than first originally thought.

8 Loxley park P Good site subject to FARRRS. If demand in area there are better sites. Good site for larger high end users – campus type development?. A reserve site? Without FARRRS there is sufficient land in the area already.

9 West 0f A614 P Agree with original findings.

10 Inland Port P Good site. 2 different rail lines in therefore good. Rail operator lined up for terminal. Screening issue with residential (colliery). Inland Port will be a 24hr operation.

11 Redhouse 2 (former Paddington Bear factory)

P See also sites 16/171/172. Old user on site. Issues with access. Could be part of one larger allocation. Scheduled ancient monument (Roman Ridge) in area and SSI – could be an amenity or a constraint.

12 Adjacent to rail line P Park and ride site extends into part of it. Access issues - tight over bridge. Better sites elsewhere in Carcroft. High cost to bring forward - site too small to pay for utilities etc.

13 Adjacent Old Mill Field P Check scores. Not a good site.

14 Nimbus park E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

15 Thorpe Marsh Power Station P Access issues - but good canal and rail access. Is leisure an appropriate use? High remediation costs. Flooding issues – would need to be water compatible uses.

16 Redhouse Lane P

Issues - overhead pylons, cemetery. Would suit smaller use scheme 10-30,000 sq ft, B1 office (out of town). Highways scheme is key to success, therefore needs higher value uses to help pay. Frontage development.

17 Brodsworth Quarry P Agree with original scores.

18 Off Hurst Lane P Change M5 score to 0. More preferable sites in area even if FARRRS is built.

19 South of Rail Line P No comments given.

APPENDIX I

95

20 South of Canal adjacent Earth Centre P Split by canal. Very poor access. Do not agree with retention as employment use. Suitable for leisure.

21 Adjacent Hill Top Road P Potential for existing businesses to expand. Issues with topography. Local market site. What is the planning history? - has been some interest.

22 Off High Common Lane P Agree with original findings.

23 Ringways Garage P Retain as employment site. Change M1 to 3. Interest in site.

24 New Road P Check database.

25 Hunt Lane E Centurion site. Excellent site but on functional floodplain.

26 Ings Road P High flood zone.

27 Pastures Rd (Ben Bailey site) P

See also 113. History to site. Very large site occupiers would only want smaller sites. One of very few sites in Doncaster’s part of Dearne Valley. Would need junction improvements. Would maybe attract a 'cheaper' B2 end user. Enterprise zone reduced demand.

28 Former Pit Tip P Recent application for mixed use - check history. Polypipe application for lorry parking. Change M1 to 3.

29 East of Selby Road P Suitable for smaller units. Change M1 score.

30 Askern Industrial Estate E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

33 Former Car Park P Move to 'Existing' category.

34 Bombardier P Re-look at this is it in the wrong category?

35 Thorne South P

Re name 'Tudworth Hall Farm'. Disagree with findings (particularly compared to Bradholme Farm). Alter boundary - small site closer to Bradholme. Service/utilities issues. Segregated from Thorne/settlements. Chance for east bound slip road to alleviate traffic to M180, improve access to Thorne (under 'benefits' check score). A Gent and G Sadler declared an interest in the site.

APPENDIX I

96

36 Cultural and Civic Quarter E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

37 St Sepulchre Gate West E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

38 Thorne Colliery P Some interest in site. Recycling/ manufacturing?. Poor access. Change score M1, M3. There are better sites.

40 The Park P Railway line suitable buffer. Access very poor for employment. Affect amenity of residential area or other users.

41 Adjacent Adwick Station P Same applies re site 40.

42 Adjacent J37 A1M P See site 157.

43 East of J37 A1M P See site 157.

44 Caravan Park P Agree with findings.

45 Tudor Rose P Agree with findings. Check spelling of address.

46 Sewage Works P

Poor access through residential area or rear of Balby Carr Bank). Good site if access issues overcome. Have been upgraded recently. Suggest Yorkshire Water are contacted about this site. Better sites than this in area.

47 Sewage Works P Has been upgraded recently. Contact Yorkshire Water.

48 Armthorpe Concept Masterplan P Good access. Issue with pylons. Priority sites on West Moor Park went well. Extend line around uses to 'south' therefore improve that area.

49 Common Road P Agree with findings.

51 Poultry Packing Station E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

52 Off Junction 6 M18 (BMW site) E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

53 Depot Site E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

54 Adjacent The Dutchman E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

APPENDIX I

97

55 Carcroft Enterprise Park E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

56 Owston Common E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

57 Off York Road E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

58 Off Jossey Lane E

Should be a residential site. Set aside part of site for small business workspace. Would small business workspace concentrate or spread through area. Mixed use? Size of site not sustainable in this area apart from open storage (current use). Size to big to concentrate with small business use. Strong case for mixed use site if re-developed. Old buildings - not great quality (score lowered). Corrugated asbestos roofs - big problem.

59 Millfield Road E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

60 Wheatley park E Re allocate as residential.

61 Optima site off Askern Rd. E

Flood risk issues. Alternative use most likely residential - would be attractive housing site. Better alternative sites locally. Links with local workforce/proximity of site to population. Connectivity Askern/Toll Bar/ Bentley not good. Bus connectivity is good. Buildings (Optima) 40 years old - apart from glass office extension. Would probably stay in employment use until current occupier leaves. Demand in this area for small workspaces for start up business - e.g. former mining community. Community links with business opportunity? Keep and redevelop at some stage.

62 Doncaster Motor Spares E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

64 Depot Site E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

65 Works Site - ex J Carr joinery E Encourage redevelopment. Access issues.

67 Brunel Road Estate E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

68 Factory Site (De Mulders) E Very important site in Doncaster. Flood zone 3a, surrounded by 3b.

69 Bentley Ings E Poor access. Extension to De-Mulders only.

APPENDIX I

98

70 Builders Yard Site E Gateway site. Flood defences are an issue - Zone 3a.

71 The Ings E Retain - good site.

72 Clayfields E Retain - good site. Scores altered.

73 Kelham Street E Retain. Good site for local users.

74 Hexthorpe Industrial Estate E Poor access. Retain - local market need.

75 Works Site E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

76 Works Site (Carpet right) E Old buildings with new frontages. Not great for employment. Poor access. Re-allocate.

77 Off Sheffield Road E Strange shape. Poor site. Re-allocate.

78 Depot Site E Better site than 77. More regular shaped site. Small access issues. Retain.

79 Kearsley Brook E Better as a 'Green' site. Not suitable as employment. Environmental improvements needed. Keep council depot. Wath close by where there is a lot of employment.

80 Whitelea Grove (Discount Gas) E Retain. Excellent shape and size.

81 Works Site E Poor access. New and fully occupied. Should be retained. Small units - suitable to local users.

82 Depot Site E Units split into smaller units. Main building sub-divided. Definite retained site. Could be re-developed in future.

83 Brick works E

Old Hepworth site. Good for residential re-development? If existing user moves out would not be marketed as an employment site. Limited type of business could re-occupy because of location. Could be compatible with manufacturing use? Not a good employment site if it was a blank canvas (new site). Is a major manufacturing site, is close to RHADS. FARRRS links could improve access. Site would be attractive to 'high end; user. Worth retaining because of proximity to RHADS. Could be a key area for Bassetlaw Local Authority. Worth reserving and keeping for employment use.

APPENDIX I

99

84 Sewage Pumping Station E Very bad access. Leisure/water related use? Not suitable as employment site.

85 Barton Lane E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

86 West Moor Park E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

87 A1M/A638 E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

88 Capitol Park E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

89 Hatfield Triangle P Would not need this entire site.

91 Powerpark P Planning permission granted.

92 Holme Wood Farm East Junction 4 P

See also site ref 93. Existing application for aqua park. Good site from marketing perspective. Would be encroachment into countryside. Big enough to pay for utilities - sub station required. M18 requirement. Depends how many sites required - don’t allocate just because it scores well.

93 Holme Wood (Seven Yards Farm) P See site ref 92.

94 Chase Park E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

95 Carcroft Industrial Estate/Wellsyke Road/Bentley Moor industrial Estate. E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

96 Chappell Drive E Waterfront area. DMBC priority. Boundary needs to include car park. Mixed use.

97 Waterfront P Mixed use scheme (commercial area). DMBC owned (gas works separate).

98 Marshgate E Need overall strategy for site and whole area. Mixed use scheme.

100 Balby Carr South P

Depends on development of surrounding land. Issues with road. Mixed use on west of site then employment to east. If housing on all then conflict with adjacent employment (noise/access). Impact on Potteric Carr?

101 Balby Carr 2 (First Point Business Park) E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

APPENDIX I

100

102 Balby Carr 1 (Wright Business Park and Railport) E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

103 Balby Carr Bank E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

104 Leisure Park E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

105 Doncaster Carr/White Rose Way E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

106 Rail Station & Works Site E Retain. Ideal for rail related enquires (change score to 3). Subject to multiple leases. One landowner – Railtrack? (change score to 3).

107 Airport Business Park 1 P

Already has planning permission – air related. Air related condition could be lifted - no interest from air related business. If airport is to grow then needs 'open' employment uses - would benefit Doncaster to encourage development. Market activity will dictate end users. Not near motorway, even with FARRRS - too many roundabouts.

108 Airport E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed

109 Sports ground/Hayfield Business Park (airport) E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

111 Bankwood Lane E

Retain. Forms part of larger strategic employment site (Eco town, FARRRS, Inland Port). Present access to site a problem (people not interested at present but would be if FARRRS goes ahead).

112 Power Station Site P Planning app in for residential. Change M1 to 0. Eyesore, needs an 'end' use.

113 Sewage Works P See also site ref 27.

114 Doncaster Road, Denaby E Good location if a cleared site. Value added use if market picks up.

115 Carcroft Common Phases 3 & 4 P

Carcroft does attract occupiers. Running sand underneath. Retain, but is it capable of development? If any demand it would have come forward by now. Any other sites which developers would prefer. Need for 'public' owned sites. Change M2 score to 5 – one ownership.

116 Wheatley Hall Road 1 E Retain.

APPENDIX I

101

117 Wheatley Hall Road 2 (Part Quest Park) E

Amend boundary - take out playing field (Parklands). Large building to be demolished soon, 1970's building (low base) is being retained. Companies leasing it out cheaply. Wider/long term use depends on end use of McCormick site. Redevelopment in progress. Buildings score dropped to 3 as Quest Park good but the older buildings are poor. Retain.

118 Wheatley Hall Road 4 E See site ref 119.

119 Wheatley Hall Road 3 E

See also site ref 118. Two good buildings, rest are poor. Wheatley Hall Road does create a boundary. Residential on one side, employment on the other. Not connected to the motorway - within 5 miles works for B8. Retain.

120 Hungerhill P Change M2 score to 5 (council owned). Mixed use. Limited re adjacent uses (school/residential). Limited access.

121 East of Bentley Road E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

122 Doncaster Industry Park E Mixed use site - therefore must be employment - S106. Separate ownership which could hinder or enhance a mixed use scheme.

123 Askern Saw Mills P Should be retained. Good site. Askern needs employment.

124 King Edward Road E Amend site boundary. Retain.

125 Coulman Road Industrial Estate E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

126 Eco Business Park E Needs connecting into Powerpark development. Retain but improve access.

127 Gunhills Lane E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

128 Kirk Sandall Industrial Estate E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

129 Kirk Sandall Industrial Estate West E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

130 Shaw Lane E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

131 Churchill Road E Adjoins Waterfront (DMBC) scheme. May affect neighbouring uses. Mixed use – adds buffer to Waterfront scheme and employment on other side.

APPENDIX I

102

132 North of Station Road, Askern E Good building (T&D) and Petrol station. Old school building needs refurbishment. Should be retained for employment use. No issues with compatibility.

133 Planet Road E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

134 Carcroft Extension P Flooding issues (boggy site) - flooded in 2008. Very costly site to bring forward.

135 Carcroft Extension 2 E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

136 Mexborough South E Retain. Mexborough needs employment use. Good frontage. Some reasonable buildings. Public sector intervention required.

137 Denaby Lane Industrial Estate E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

138 Warmsworth Halt Industrial Estate E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

139 Broomhouse Lane Industrial Estate E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

140 Council Depot E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

142 Lakeside 1 E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

143 Lakeside E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

144 Earth Centre E Is this in the correct category? - should it be a potential site as it is undeveloped. Residential use acceptable (has outline planning permission).

145 Pastures Road South E Mixed use to get good quality development. Flooding issues.

146 Moor Lane P Application submitted by Urban-I has been approved.

147 Wheatley Hall Road 5 E Retain.

149 Railport E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

150 Lakeside Village E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

APPENDIX I

103

151 Trax park E Site to be retained. Not to be discussed.

152 Site 1 adjacent A614/J6 M18 P See also 153. Too small, odd shape.

153 Site 2 adjacent A614/J6 M18 P See 152.

154 Adjacent Hare & Tortoise, Rossington Bridge P Agree with findings - even with FARRRS is not a good site.

155 Westfield Farm P Would this site create too much employment for this area? Especially with extension to West Moor Park. Better sites elsewhere more easily brought forward.

156 North of West Moor Park, Armthorpe. P Suitable with regard to marketability but occupier may prefer West Moor Park extension. Change M1 to 5. Highway, service, drainage issue. Next to M Way.

157 Ducker Holt P

J37 southbound at peak time congestion to M18. Market interest - separate from residential services would be difficult, Greenbelt issues, difficult to allocate, isolated (workforce/lunchtime issues). A1m as buffer. Doubt if there is sustained demand for large floorplate site in A1m corridor (Redhouse area) compared to M18. A1(M) and M18 are two different markets. Is there a need to balance land across the borough? What is Wakefield MBC allocating? Redhouse Phase 2 is a more appropriate development.

158 Higgins Farm P Better sites elsewhere - with or without FARRRS. Better sites to West of RHA.

159 Airport Business Park Expansion P Good site.

160 Granby Site E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

161 Mexborough Business Centre E Good site for business start up. Investment gone into site. Retain.

162 Askern Allotments E Site to be de-allocated. Not to be discussed.

163 Wheatley Hall Road 6 E Retain.

164 Bankwood East P Woodland. Agree with findings.

APPENDIX I

104

165 Bankwood North P Access. Requires FARRRS. Potential to incorporate into existing site. Change key finding – suitable as employment land.

166 Adj Cozen Croft - New Site P Marketability depends on how accessible it is. Use road as boundary. Interest if allocated. The best use would be small units. Issue with pylon.

167 Adj Shepherd House - New Site P See scores for similar, adjacent sites.

168 Armthorpe South - New Site P Should reflect site 155.

169 Thorne Road - New Site P Odd shape. Better sites elsewhere. Poor access. Single sided development (due to shape of site) - not appropriate.

170 Redhouse Island 1 - New Site P See also 11/16/171/172. Redhouse Farm. - stay as Greenbelt. Highway issues. Enough employment land already in area.

171 Redhouse Island 2 - New Site P

See also 11/170/172. Sites better if merged (Redhouse Island sites) issues with Roman Ridge (Ancient Monument) and Highways. Ownership need checking via representations - single or multiple?

172 Redhouse Island 3 - New Site P See 170/171/11.

173 Ferry Road 1 - New Site P See scores for 167.

174 Ferry Road 2 - New Site P See scores for 167.

175 Croft Road 1 - New Site P Similar to Higgins Farm (158).

176 Croft Road 2 - New Site P Similar to Higgins Farm (158).

177 Croft Road 3 - New Site P Similar to Higgins Farm (158).

178 Mosham Road – New Site P Similar to adjacent quarry site. Score as other site to West (18).