planning brief – july 2013 · planning brief 11 archaeology 4.3 the site may have some...

SALTERGATE HEALTH CENTRE AND MARSDEN STREET CLINIC

Planning Brief – July 2013

Saltergate Health Centre and Marsden Street Clinic Planning Brief

2


3

SALTERGATE HEALTH CENTRE AND MARSDEN STREET CLINIC

DRAFT PLANNING BRIEF – May 2013

1.0 INTRODUCTION 2.0 THE SITE 3.0 PLANNING AND LAND USE POLICY 4.0 CONTEXT ANALYSIS 5.0 DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS 6.0 IMPLEMENTATION APPENDIX 1 Planning application supporting information

This product includes mapping data licensed from Ordnance Survey with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office. © Crown Copyright and/or database right 2013. All rights reserved. Licence number 100018505


4

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Purpose of brief 1.1 The purpose of this brief is to:

a. Identify and clarify the planning policy that applies to the site, including the land uses that are considered appropriate;

b. Provide an urban design framework for its future redevelopment; c. Set out the requirements for a future planning application on the site; d. Act as a material planning consideration in determining future planning

application(s) on the site; e. Provide a mechanism through which the public can influence the

proposals for the site; and f. Provide certainty for the landowners, potential developers and the public

in relation to the future redevelopment of the site.

Status of Brief

1.6 It is intended that the Borough Council will approve this planning brief as a piece of non-statutory planning guidance. Although it will not form a part of the Council’s formal Local Development Framework (LDF), it will represent the Council’s stated planning policy position for this site. The approved Planning Brief will be a material consideration in guiding and informing any development control decisions made on applications for planning permission relating to the site.


5

2.0 THE SITE

2.1 Located within walking distance of Chesterfield Town Centre, this 1.2ha site consists of the former Saltergate Health Centre, Marsden Street Clinic and a small public car park on Marsden Street.

2.2 The surrounding area has a mix of uses, with the facilities of Chesterfield Town Centre to the south east and well established residential areas to the north and west, alongside a range of other institutional uses including health uses and the offices of North East Derbyshire District Council, which sits between the site and the nearest main road, Saltergate.


6

2.3 The Saltergate Health Centre/Marsden Street Clinic and the Marsden Street Car Park are, at the time of writing, in separate ownerships (Chesterfield Royal Hospital Trust and Chesterfield Borough Council) but are both expected to be available for redevelopment in the immediate future. Whilst it is not a requirement of this planning brief that both sites are redeveloped jointly, there are obvious benefits to this and the Local Planning Authority would welcome discussions on schemes that incorporate both parts of the site.

2.4 At the time of writing, the offices of North East Derbyshire are not available for redevelopment and there are no specific plans for its disposal, as such it has not been included within the remit of this planning brief. However, in the event that this situation were to change, it could form a logical extension of, or follow on development to, the Health Centre site. Developers wishing to incorporate this site are advised to contact the council for further advice.

2.5 Although the site lacks a strong street frontage of its own, it is well connected to the surrounding areas. Vehicle access to the site is available from Saltergate and, in limited form, from Spencer Street and from Marsden


7

Street. Brickyard Walk runs along the northern boundary of the site, adding to an extensive network of Pedestrian connections that help to link the site into the surrounding residential areas, including Tennyson Avenue, Queen Street and St Marys Primary School to the west.

2.6 The site currently contains a number of former health centre buildings of no particular architectural or historic merit, although surrounding buildings are of higher quality, with parts of the surrounding area (and a small part of the site) designated as conservation areas. There are a number of mature trees on the site that are covered by a Tree Preservation Order.

2.7 The Northern Gateway site, which is to be the subject of a major expansion of the town’s retail core, lies immediately to the east, on the opposite side of Marsden Street. This development will provide a new foodstore, high street retail, restaurants, a cinema and hotel and other retail and leisure opportunities within walking distance of the site, and further residential development on the east side of Marsden Street. Wilson Bowden has been appointed as Development Partner and a detailed scheme is being drawn up with the aim of starting on site 2014.the development is expected to be complete by 2016. To the west, the former Saltergate Football Stadium is being redeveloped for housing by Barratt Homes.

3.0 PLANNING AND LAND USE POLICY

3.1 Planning Policy for Chesterfield is set out in the adopted Chesterfield Borough Local Plan (2006) and in a range of Supplementary Planning Documents. There is also a Town Centre Masterplan (approved in 2010)


8

which sets out proposals for the future development of Chesterfield Town Centre.

3.2 Planning Policy for Chesterfield is set out in the Chesterfield Local Plan; - Core Strategy (2013) and saved policies from the Replacement Chesterfield Borough Local Plan (2006) and in a range of Supplementary Planning Documents. There is also a Town Centre Masterplan (approved in 2010) which sets out proposals for the future development of Chesterfield Town Centre.

3.3 The site is within the Town Centre Boundary as identified on the proposals map, but not within the retail area as described in Core Strategy policy PS1. PS1 seeks to support economic development by encouraging a diverse range of uses in the town centre including retail, office, community facilities, leisure and food and drink uses. It also seeks to enhance the range and quality of residential uses within the town centre.

3.4 The local plan includes the site within Chesterfield town centre (under policy SHC1) but outside the area identified as the ‘Retail Core’. Within this area the local plan allows for the following range of uses

a. financial and professional services (use class A2); b. restaurants and cafes (use class A3); c. hot food takeaways (use class A5); d. residential uses including dwellings (C3), hotels (C1) and residential

institutions (C2, including care homes , hospitals and residential training); e. non-residential institutions (D1, including health centres, schools, places

of worship etc); f. offices (use class B1); g. drinking establishments (A4) and leisure uses (D2) will only be permitted

subject to further consideration of their impact on neighbouring residents and uses.

3.5 As a location outside of the retail area, with the exception of small scale neighbourhood shops (of under 200 sqm), retail use (use class A1) would not normally be allowed in this location

3.6 The Chesterfield Town Centre Masterplan was approved in 2010 and informed the development of the Core Strategy. It identifies the area around the Saltergate Clinic as a development opportunity and suggests it could form part of a ‘Civic Quarter’ (that also encompasses Chesterfield Town Hall, North East Derbyshire District Council Offices) that could be developed for office use. The masterplan is a non-statutory masterplan and other appropriate uses can also be considered. There are already proposals and planning permissions in place for significant amounts of new office floorspace at sites including Chesterfield Waterside (30,000 sqm) and Derby Road (25,000sqm) which will provide for new office users and other uses may be more appropriate and deliverable for the Saltergate site.


9

3.7 The site has also been included in the council’s Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA), which identifies the site as developable for housing, but not currently deliverable (as it was still occupied at the time of survey). It has also been included in the council’s Sites and Boundaries Development Plan Document Issues and Options paper as a potential housing allocation.

Preferred Uses

3.8 Looking at the planning policies and the surrounding area, the most appropriate uses are likely to be residential (which could include care homes or similar), office use or replacement health/institutional uses. A mix of these uses, which also includes an element of the other uses set out above, would also be appropriate. Lacking a strong frontage, town centre uses (retail and food and drink) would not be appropriate unless as ancillary to another use.


10

4.0 CONTEXT ANALYSIS

Historic background 4.1 At least one long building or terraced row and a large pond were already in

existence in the north western part of this area by the beginning of the 19th century. It is possible that they had their origins in the post-medieval period. Later 19th century maps have Brickyard Walk running up to and into this area as well as a terrace of houses called Brickyard Row suggesting it may have been the site of a brickyard. It is not known whether the pond was ornamental or whether it originally was part of a brickyard.

4.2 The 1876 map shows buildings including a pair of semi-detached houses,

Westpool Villas, and a terrace of small houses, Westpool Place, were present within the site. By 1876 a ropewalk ran along the south-eastern side of the component. The area was further developed in the 20th century as it appears today (source: Derbyshire Extensive Urban Survey, Chesterfield Archaeological Assessment Report 2002).


11

Archaeology 4.3 The site may have some archaeological potential. Further work may be

required to assess the site, especially the northern part, through any development proposals, relating in particular to post-medieval activity. Any planning application for the site should therefore contain the results of an archaeological desk-based assessment, carried out by a suitably qualified and experienced archaeological contractor. Any further work required could be conditioned as a post-determination requirement (see 6.8.g).


12

Character Areas


13

4.4 The Saltergate Clinic is in a location subject to a range of complex

influences, which are discussed in this section. These should be used to guide the layout and design of any development proposals. How proposals have addressed these influences should be set out in the Design and Access Statement accompanying an application for planning permission (see section 6.0).

4.5 A range of character areas have been identified in the vicinity of the site

based upon building age, typology and land uses. The site is in an area of transition between the retail and commercial activities of the town centre to the east and south east of the site and the predominantly residential areas to the west. Immediately to the north and south are the NHS Scarsdale Clinic and North East Derbyshire District Council (NEDDC) offices respectively.

4.6 The predominant residential character areas comprise Edwardian and

Victorian terraced streets (Spencer Street and Marsden Street) with some larger detached and semi-detached dwellings on Queen Street and Tennyson Avenue to the west, which is an attractive tree lined avenue. Modern terraces are also located around the former workhouse (now converted to flats). These residential areas generally have a modest human scale, a fine urban grain and good enclosure to the street scene through the built form and use of boundary walls and hedging.

4.7 In contrast the mixed commercial uses and council offices comprise buildings

with larger footprints and generally bigger scale than nearby residential streets. They are also associated with areas of surface parking in the spaces around the buildings.

Building Heights 4.8 All of the buildings within the planning brief boundary area are single storey

with some higher, 1.5 storey elements, within the main clinic building. To the south the NEDDC offices are inside a larger scale four storey building parallel to Saltergate. Scarsdale Clinic immediately to the north includes both two-storey and single storey elements.

4.9 The majority of residential streets are predominantly two storeys in height

with some 2.5 storey elements, particularly those buildings in corner positions.


14

Tree Preservation Orders

4.10 A group Tree Preservation Order covers the site at present. A full Tree Survey will be required to determine which trees are worthy of continued retention and which could potentially be removed. In the event that it is agreed that certain trees can be removed, it is expected that any proposals for the redevelopment of this site will include suitable replacement planting.


15

Heritage Context

4.11 There are two buildings adjacent to the site (The Roman Catholic Church of

the Annunciation on Spencer Street and the Methodist Chapel on Marsden Street) which are included in the statutory list of buildings of special architectural or historic interest. In addition, a number of undesignated heritage assets lie adjacent to the sites, which, although not on the statutory list, represent buildings of merit for their architectural and historic interest. This includes the remnants of a stone boundary wall at the eastern part edge of the site.

4.12 The site is also located adjacent to two designated Conservation Areas;

Spencer Street Conservation Area to the north, and the Chesterfield Town Centre Conservation Area to the south and west (which includes part of the site entrance). To the northeast lies Abercrombie Street Conservation Area (just beyond the Scarsdale clinic site) which includes the remaining part of the Chesterfield Union Workhouse, which is partially visible from the site.


16

The site and its surroundings have a clear historic importance within this area.

Views and vistas

Views into the site 4.13 The site is not highly visible from the surrounding area, as it is relatively

contained by existing surrounding development. Views from Saltergate are limited to glimpses along the entrance drive adjacent to the NEDDC office. This view is framed by an attractive avenue of trees and closed by the tower of the Church of the Annunciation on the northern edge of the site.

4.14 From the north the site can be viewed from Spencer Street as well as

glimpses along Brickyard Walk, a pedestrian walkway bordering the site. The site can also currently be viewed from the east along Marsden Street through a gap between the Methodist Chapel and the terrace to its north, although any development of the separate Marsden Street frontage could obscure this aspect.


17

Views out of the site

4.15 To the north of the site the prominent grade II listed Roman Catholic Church

of Annunciation provides a key landmark feature. To west of the site there are early 20th century houses backed up with a stone/brick boundary wall. An opportunity exists to enhance the western part of the site to improve the character and setting of the site.

4.16 There are also some longer views out of the site towards the crooked spire of

St Mary and All Saints.

Access and Connections 4.17 The site lies on the axis of two strong pedestrian desire lines. The north-

south desire line links Saltergate to the south with Spencer Street to the north. The east-west desire line follows the current alignment of the historic walkway Brickyard Walk, and connects Marsden Street in the east with Spencer Street and Tennyson Avenue to the west. There is also a potential future link to the east from Marsden Street to the proposed Northern Gateway Town Centre extension that, if provided, would create a direct


18

walking route from the site into the town centre. The significance of these pedestrian routes reflects the important position of the site as an area of transition between the town centre and the primarily residential areas to the west.

4.18 Both current pedestrian routes are well used although the Brickyard Walk

path is enclosed along much of its length by high walls of brick and concrete panelling, giving it a narrow and unappealing feel. This is exacerbated by its curved alignment that prevents pedestrians from seeing the ends of the path in either direction.

4.19 The site currently has available vehicle access points to Saltergate to the

south and Spencer Street to the north, although the predominant access in use is that to Saltergate. There is currently limited access to part of the site (at the eastern end) from Marsden Street across the council owned car park.

4.20 The main access to the site is from Saltergate. This access also serves the

rear car park for the NHS building on Tennyson Avenue. The internal access road reduces in width towards the junction with Saltergate around some significant (protected) trees. Visibility to the right for drivers exiting the site onto Saltergate is extremely limited due to the protected wall and trees around the adjacent Avondale Surgery, achieving only a fraction of the 2.4m x 50m that would be normally required to meet current safe minimum criteria.

4.21 Spencer Street is relatively wide, albeit not to current modern dimensions in

parts and serves a considerable number of terraced dwellings, a public house and a church / parish centre. With little opportunity for off-street parking there is considerable competition for roadside parking. In addition visibility at the junction with Newbold Road also falls below desirable minimum criteria for the speeds of vehicles observed passing the site. Access to the main part of the site is restricted by gate, although parking spaces for approximately 18 cars can be accessed from Spencer Street.

4.22 The limitations of the access points, with only limited potential for

improvement, are a potential constraint on development. That said, the site is currently operating as a health centre already generating a certain degree of traffic, the site is also conveniently located within the town centre to take advantage of the range of facilities, walking routes and alternative means of transport available to future residents. The transport impact of any development will need to be assessed to ensure that it is no greater than that which could be generated by the existing use.


19

Site Appraisal: Constraints 4.23 This part of the brief provides an analysis of the site and identifies both

constraints and assets that should be used to inform a design response that is sensitive and appropriate to its surroundings. Key urban design considerations are set out in the drawing and text below.

4.24 Within the site itself there are relatively few features of significance. Trees

protected by TPO have been identified (see above) and a length of natural stone wall of local interest is also identified on the eastern edge of the site. In addition, many of the site boundaries adjoining neighbouring properties comprise relatively tall walls of brick or brick and stone and provide attractive boundary features in their own right.

4.25 The existing buildings are of no historic or architectural significance. The

retention of these buildings is not therefore a requirement of this brief. 4.26 The site shares a number of boundaries with existing residential properties

that are considered to be sensitive edges where there may be a risk of overlooking, loss of light or overbearing relationships being created by new development. These must be addressed with care in order to maintain the amenity of nearby residents.


20

4.27 Constrained points of access and surrounding heritage assets represent off-

site constraints that will require careful resolution as part of any future development proposals for the site. Important views and the setting of any heritage assets must inform the design process and subsequent proposals.

4.28 A further major constraint is the irregular shape of the site which makes

creating logical development parcels more difficult.

Site Appraisal: Urban Design Analysis

4.29 The urban design analysis identifies those significant features or characteristics within and immediately surrounding the site that will influence the approach to the design of development proposals. The above plan provides a diagrammatic analysis of the site.

4.30 Key aspects of the site appraisal:

a. Positive Boundaries - Retain existing positive boundaries wherever possible.


21

b. Negative Boundaries - Enhance existing footpath along Brickyard Walk. Remove negative brick and concrete boundary walls and relate development to overlook the footpath.

c. Space Leaks - Create definition to weakly defined edges through new built form.

d. Trees of Townscape Significance – Retain and incorporate within layout wherever possible.

e. Buildings of negative or neutral appearance – Demolition acceptable in principle.

f. Exposed Rear Walls – Potential to limit visibility or exposed edges. g. Sensitive Boundaries – Maintain residential amenity of neighbouring

properties. h. Nodal Point – Design response should recognise the significance of the

location as a point where key routes cross, in terms of built form, creating a gateway from Spencer Street and the design and treatment of the public realm.

i. Pinch Point - Access from Saltergate is narrow but existing Avenue should be retained.

j. Major Local Landmark – Proposals should defer to the significance of this landmark maintaining or creating views to aid legibility.

k. Minor Local Landmark – Views to minor local landmarks should be retained or created where possible.

l. Heritage assets – The presence of multiple heritage assets immediately around the margins of the site and beyond will require the setting and significance of these assets to be assessed as part of the design process and to inform the subsequent design, layout and appearance of any development.

m. Height/Scale – Due to the presence of the nearby residential buildings the height, scale and mass of any proposed buildings will need to have regard to this relationship. Parts of the site are more suited to accommodating larger buildings than others, with greater scope for increased height and scale through the central part of the site towards the NEDDC offices immediately to the south.

5.0 DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS

Land uses

5.1 It is considered that the most appropriate use for the site would be residential dwellings. This has the potential to extend the attractive residential areas to the north and west, on a sit well related to the services and amenities of Chesterfield Town Centre. Development for predominantly family housing would be most appropriate, although with potential for a mix of other types where it provides opportunities for notable buildings.

5.2 Alternatively, the site would be well suited to retirement accommodation

and/or residential care homes, benefiting from a relatively quiet location that is still close to services and amenities within Chesterfield Town Centre.


22

5.3 Other alternative uses of the site could include commercial office or institutional uses (such as new or replacement healthcare uses), again benefitting from the edge of town centre location and excellent amenities. The area to the south and east is characterised by office and institutional use and there is an opportunity to expand on this character as was envisaged in the town centre masterplan ‘Civic Quarter’ proposals.

General Principles

Urban Design and layout 5.4 Any development proposals will need to demonstrate (through a Design and

Access statement) that the key elements of the site appraisal described at 4.27 and figure on the Urban Design Site Appraisal Diagram (on page 16) have been considered in the design and layout of any new development.

5.5 The form and type of any housing proposed should reflect the surrounding

historic context of the site, particularly residential areas to the north and west, and deliver a high quality of environment suitable for the setting of Conservation Areas and Listed buildings. As a site close to the town centre and in line with the adopted Local Plan, a minimum density of 40 dwellings per hectare would normally be sought. However given the limitation imposed by the shape and layout of the site, residential development on this site should aim to achieve a density of at least 40 30 dwellings per hectare, approximately 35 dwellings. Higher densities may be possible dependant on the type and mix of housing proposed, therefore no upper limit is imposed. However any higher density schemes will still need to demonstrate that they meet the other requirements of this brief, particularly in terms of safe access, highways impact, and relationship to surrounding properties and character.

5.6 Building heights may vary across the site, from being a maximum of 2-2.5

storeys adjacent to residential properties to higher in the centre of the site and where related to taller buildings such as the NEDDC offices.

5.7 In this case of residential care or commercial/institutional uses, which are

likely to require a smaller number of larger buildings it may be appropriate to consider larger built forms reflecting the more substantial scale and character of the surrounding civic and office uses (such as the offices of North East Derbyshire and Chesterfield Borough council offices, or the converted hospital, Manvers Court). More substantial buildings should be located more centrally in the site to protect the setting and amenity of adjacent residential properties and the setting of listed buildings.

5.8 For all possible used, particular care should be taken over the relationship

between any new buildings on the site and existing adjoining residential properties, to minimise potential for overlooking and overshadowing.

5.9 The materials used for development should be chosen to reflect and

compliment the surroundings of the development (although this should not


23

prevent the use of modern materials and innovative design approaches where appropriate).

5.10 The council has published further guidance on residential design in the form

of a Supplementary Planning Document – “Successful Places, A Guide to Sustainable Housing Layout and Design”. Developers are advised to refer to this SPD when preparing proposals for housing. Development for no residential purposes will be considered against the criteria set out in policy CS17 Of the council’s Local Plan-Core Strategy. Pedestrian and Cycle Access.

5.11 Any development should ensure that there is safe, convenient pedestrian and

vehicle access into and within the site. The layout should facilitate and encourage direct north-south connectivity between Saltergate and Spencer Street and east west between Tennyson Avenue and Marsden Street (for connections in to the Northern Gateway Site). Pedestrian and cycle routes should be designed and laid out to ensure that they are visible from development to ensure they are safe and attractive at all hours, whilst allowing occupiers security through natural surveillance.

5.12 Brickyard Lane in particular should be widened to become suitable as a

shared pedestrian and cycle route, of a 3m minimum width, overlooked by development to ensure security. Alternative arrangements which deliver the same level of accessibility through realignment of the route will also be considered.

Vehicle Access

5.13 Primary vehicle access to the site should continue to be from Saltergate, with only very limited vehicle access from Spencer Street and Marsden Street likely to be acceptable. The layout of development should not create vehicle ‘through routes’ (except for the purposes of emergency access). Although it is anticipated that traffic generation from residential development at 40 30 dwellings per hectare will be less than the potential of the existing, permitted use, this will need to be demonstrated through a Transport Assessment (TA). Other potential uses, such as office use, have the potential to generate higher levels of traffic; in this case the amount of proposed floorspace should be justified through a Transport Assessment that clearly demonstrates that the level of vehicle traffic generated will be no greater than, and preferably less than, the existing use at each of the junctions.

5.14 The northern part of the site is currently used on an informal basis for parking

in connection with the Church of the Annunciation on Spencer Street. The loss of this space through redevelopment is likely to lead to increased pressure for on-street parking, both on Spencer Street and within any new development. Consideration should be given to forms of layout that allow for some on-street parking in this area, possibly in conjunction with traffic controls on other new streets, in order to reduce the scope for conflict.


24

5.15 In the event that developers are able secure access to Marsden Street across third party land, the TA will need to demonstrate that this can be controlled in such a way that the level of use is not greater than under the current permitted uses.

5.16 Both the Saltergate access and Spencer Street/Newbold Road Junction are

acknowledged as being below current standards, but with limited opportunity for improvement. Any measures to improve visibility, such as reducing wall heights or moving boundaries, on Saltergate in particular, will need to balance the highways safety improvements with being carried out in a manner which is sympathetic to the town centre conservation area and character of the area, and have regard to any Tree Preservation Orders in place. Heritage

5.17 Proposals will need to preserve and enhance the setting of heritage assets.

Any development on the site will need to fully address the relationship the site has with neighbouring properties. This site is visually poor and there is an opportunity to significantly to enhance the setting of the heritage assets and the amenity of this site. Any proposals will need to fully consider the relationship the external elevations have with the surrounding area.

5.18 The development of the site would need to compliment the adjacent uses

which will respect the character and appearance of the surrounding area, enhance amenity of those living, working and visiting the area and create new links which respect the historic street patterns in the area. Developers will also need to demonstrate how proposals improve this relationship as well as enhancing the views of the site either through the development of the new structures or increasing public activity within the site.

Landscape and Habitat

5.19 Although a predominantly urban and built up site, the existing trees and landscaping can contribute to habitat and biodiversity, particularly when associated with mature trees and hedgerows in nearby residential properties. Careful landscaping, design and planting can contribute to creating and enhancing habitat and biodiversity. Development proposals will need to demonstrate an understanding of how the existing site contributes to habitat and biodiversity through an ecological assessment and demonstrate how development can enhance and contribute to this by considering these issues in the design stages of development. Particular regard should be had to enhancing opportunities for urban wildlife and species/habitats identified in the ‘Chesterfield Greenprint’, Chesterfield’s Biodiversity Action Plan such as house sparrow, starling and bats. As well as appropriate landscaping and planting, simple measures such as the inclusion of bat and bird bricks/boxes into buildings are encouraged.

Sustainable Design and Renewable Energy


25

5.20 Development proposals should take account of the provisions of the council’s ‘Sustainable Design SPD’. Specifically, residential development should be carried out to a minimum of Level Three of the Code for Sustainable Homes (or BREEAM Residential equivalent) and commercial development to a minimum BREEAM standard of Very Good. This should be demonstrated through the provision of a pre-assessment as part of a planning application and subsequently confirmed through assessment and certification post construction.

5.21 The council seeks that new development deliver 10% of its on-site energy

needs through the use of on-site renewable energy. However it is recognised that this is not always achievable due to the constraints of an individual site or development, or due to the impact upon development viability. The council will take evidence of such constraints into account, in which case the priority will be for CSH/BREEAM before specific renewable provision.

Broadband

5.22 Improvement to broadband connectivity is identified as a key priority in the

Derbyshire County Council’s Council Plan 2010 – 2014. Developers should integrate fibre optic cabling into all new residential and commercial development to support the needs of residents and businesses. This may be secured by a condition attached to a planning permission.

5.23 To give the developer an idea of approximate cost, the estimate is up to

£1000 per dwelling; however clearly this cost will vary depending on the developer’s design and choice of infrastructure supplier. It would be helpful to direct the developer to the ‘Next generation access for new build homes guide’ published by Government in 2010 which can be found online here:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/78511/10-1339-pas-2016-next-generation-access-new-build-guide.pdf

Drainage

5.24 The development of the site should take place with separate systems for foul

and surface water drainage. Foul water domestic water may discharge to the public sewer network via use of the existing site connections.

5.25 The local public sewer network does not have capacity to accept any

additional discharge of surface water from the proposal site. The use of Sustainable Drainage Systems is advised. Currently a significant part of the site is given over to hardstanding and/or roofscape. The creation of more permeable surfaces through redevelopment is encouraged as part of a SUDS approach.

5.26 The surface water discharge from the proposal to the public sewer network

must be restricted. Discharges to the public sewer must be on a like for like basis and take into account climate change and have a reduction of a


26

minimum of 30%. The developer will have to demonstrate positive drainage to the public sewer, based on a 1 in 1 year storm, to the satisfaction of Yorkshire Water and the borough council by means of investigation and calculation. On-site storage/balancing - or some other means of attenuation - of the surface water will be required before any discharge to the public sewer network is permitted.

5.27 The developer is advised to contact the relevant drainage authorities for

further advice.


27

6.0 IMPLEMENTATION

Pre-Application 6.1 Developers are encouraged to contact the Local Planning Authority in

advance of submitting any planning applications to discuss their proposals. The borough council takes a development team approach to pre-application discussions and sees them as an opportunity to identify any potential planning issues early on and minimise the need for conditions and further monitoring. No charge is made for pre-application discussions and a named point of contact will be nominated to deal with any queries.

6.2 Developers are also encouraged to involve the local community (and

neighbours) in preparing development proposals to identify and, where possible, mitigate any concerns before submitting an application.

6.3 Development proposals for the site could be brought forward through a full or

outline planning application or a hybrid approach in the event that a mix of uses is proposed.

6.4 Given the limited options for vehicle access to the site and its relationship to

adjacent listed buildings and conservation areas, any outline planning applications for the site should, as a minimum, include details of means of access (both vehicle and pedestrian), an illustrative layout and an indication of the height and massing of any buildings.

6.5 A small part of the site is within the Chesterfield Town Centre Conservation

Area. Any proposals involving substantial demolition or works in this part of the site may also require Conservation Area Consent. Pre-application discussions should be used to identify whether this is necessary or not.

Design and Access Statement

6.6 All applications will be expected to include a Design and Access Statement

showing clearly how the approach to the site has taken account of and responded to the context and issues set out in this planning brief in sections 4 and 5. Guidance from English Heritage, Building in Context, (www.building-in-context.org/) provides a useful resource on how to approach sites within a sensitive historic setting. This should be illustrated with appropriate plans and images. If applying for outline planning permission, the Design and Access Statement should set out the key design principles that will be used to inform the design of reserved matters applications.

6.7 Guidance on the production of these statements published by the

government and CABE should be utilised.

Planning Application Requirements


28

6.8 As well as a design and access statement, further supporting information should be submitted with an application to enable the Local Planning Authority to consider the application. The supporting information that will be required as a minimum to form a valid application is set out below. Where the requirement only applies to a specific use or type of application this is indicated.

a. Sustainability Statement (including pre-assessment)

b. Transport Assessment and travel plan

c. Flood Risk (Surface Water Drainage) Assessment

d. Air Quality Assessment

e. Tree Survey

f. Phase 1 Habitat and Protected Species Survey

g. Phase1 Archaeology Survey

h. Ground Investigation Report

i. Draft Section 106 Heads of Terms

j. Heritage Assessment

6.9 More information on the content and form of supporting information is given in appendix 1.

Conditions and Planning Obligations

6.10 Chesterfield Borough Council will use conditions where appropriate to ensure that development is carried out in accordance with the aims of this planning brief and to require the submission of details if necessary. The need for conditions on any planning permission granted can be minimised by submitting clear and complete plans and information with a planning application, for example on matters such as materials, landscaping and boundary treatments.

6.11 Policy GEN9 CS3 (Infrastructure Delivery) of the RCBLP Core Strategy establishes a basis for the Borough Council to seek and negotiate developer contributions where proposals are of a scale likely to have an impact on existing facilities and infrastructure through the use of S106 agreements. All such agreements will be subject to the government’s guidance in the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraphs 203-205). The council is currently preparing a Community Infrastructure Levy Schedule, but this is not expected to be adopted until 2014. In the event that a CIL Schedule is adopted prior to a planning application for the site being received, the requirements of CIL will take priority.


29

6.12 Based on the range of uses set out in this planning brief, the borough council anticipates that the following obligations would be appropriate for the site (Where the requirement only applies to a specific use or type of application this is indicated):

a. Affordable Housing (Residential Only) - Up to 40% of residential units on any housing site of more than 15 units should be affordable. The priority demand in this area is for family housing to rent. The final amount and type of affordable housing will be negotiated based on an assessment of development viability. Detailed guidance on this issue is provided in the council’s ‘Affordable and Special Needs Housing’ SPD. Any information provided on development viability will be treated in commercial confidence.

b. Education (Residential only) – Where developments of 10 units or more are likely to be occupied by people with children a financial contribution to additional education facilities will be considered. This is dependent on the forecasted capacity of the catchment area schools associated with the site.

The proposed development would fall within the shared normal areas of Abercrombie Community Primary School and Brookfield Community School. Current and future projections show that, at this point in time, the relevant Normal Area Primary School could accommodate the additional pupils arising from development at this site. However, current and future projections also show that, at this point in time, the relevant Normal Area Secondary School is over capacity and is projected to remain so. A contribution towards the provision of secondary places, at a typical cost of £2,576.42 per dwelling (based on 2012 figures) would normally be sought. Current forecasts for the catchment area schools associated with the Health Centre site suggest that there is unlikely to be sufficient capacity in the schools to accommodate the additional demand generated by the site and as such contributions are likely to be required.

The level of any such contribution will be based on an assessment of the number of primary and secondary pupils that will be generated per household, and the multipliers published annually by the DfES. Derbyshire County Council’s Children’s and Younger Adult Service can provide further information on school’s capacity and costs.

c. Public Open Space (Residential only) - The council’s requirements in terms of Public Open Space are set out in the ‘Open Space and Play Provision’ SPD. Based on a development of less than 50 dwellings, this would typically require a contribution to improving off-site facilities rather than on-site provision. The council has published a ‘ready reckoner’ on its website which can be used to estimate any likely requirement (www.chesterfield.gov.uk).

d. Public Art – The borough council typically seeks up to 1% of the total development cost of development to fund works of public art to be incorporated into the development scheme.


30

e. Highways / Transportation - The results of the Transport Assessment for the site and consultation with Derbyshire County Council as Highway Authority may identify the need for off site road junction improvements and / or improvements to public and sustainable transport measures in the vicinity. If necessary these will be secured through a legal agreement. Furthermore, the legal agreement may cover a monitoring agreement to monitor the future traffic flows from the development to identify any potential future highways impacts when and if they arise. The agreement can then ensure necessary measures are put in place to overcome any impacts identified as a result of the monitoring of the site.


31

APPENDIX 1

Planning Application Supporting Information

Sustainability Statement – this document should address how the development optimises energy and resource efficiency and the use of renewable energy sources. For the residential element it should indicate what level of the Code for Sustainable Development the proposal is expected to achieve and what measure will be used to do so. For any non-residential element this should be done with reference to the BREEAM ratings where possible. BREEAM and/or CSH pre-assessments should be provided. Core Strategy policy CS5 requires that new residential development meet level 4 of the Code for Sustainable Homes and non-residential development BREEAM Very Good.

Transport Assessment & Travel Plan –The scope of this document will need to be agreed with Derbyshire County Council as Highway Authority. In line with guidance from the Department for Transport and Local Plan Core Strategy policy TRS11 CS19 a draft travel plan should be prepared. This should demonstrate the potential for increasing the proportion of non-car trips through measures to promote walking, cycling and the use of public transport. Further advice and assistance on this can be obtained from Derbyshire County Council Environmental Services.

The TA should be undertaken at an early stage and will need to identify and compare the traffic impact of existing and proposed uses on the Saltergate and Spencer Street/Newbold Road junctions. Derbyshire County Council has recently produced the ‘North Derbyshire Traffic Model’, a dynamic SATURN model for Chesterfield and the surrounding area. Applicants are strongly advised to utilise this model in preparing their TA to ensure consistency and conformity in assessing the traffic impact of development.

Flood Risk (Surface Water Drainage) Assessment – in accordance with the requirements of the NPPF and policies CS6 of the Local Plan Core Strategy EVR10 and EVR11 of the RCBLP.

Air Quality Assessment - An air quality assessment will be required to determine the impact of additional traffic generated by the development on NO2 levels on the surrounding highways network. This is in line with the NPPF and Core Strategy policy CS7 EVR23 of the RCBLP.

Tree Survey - This should plot the accurate location of all existing trees, shrubs and hedges, including those on adjacent land which may be affected by the development, alongside land levels within the site, and should detail the following information. • The species of each tree • The tree’s height • The diameter of the tree’s stem at 1.5m above ground level and the accurate

canopy spread of each tree • An assessment of the condition of the tree including any relevant defects and any

necessary or proposed remedial works.


32

• A clear indication of which trees are to be retained and those which are to be removed. If it is proposed to remove a tree the reason should be given, including if the tree is in the way of the development

• The age class of the tree, together with an assessment of potential future growth. • The tree’s contribution to the street scene, visual amenity and ecological

importance. • Which trees are within the Town Centre Conservation Area and which trees are

the subject of a Tree Preservation Order (with reference to the relevant TPO). Each tree on the development site should be classified for its ‘desirability for retention’. Guidelines on classifying trees can be found in BS 5837:2005 Trees in relation to construction. The use of other systems may also be acceptable but it is important that the survey identifies what criteria have been used to classify trees. For trees which are being retained, the survey should indicate the minimum distance of protective fencing around the trees. In assessing whether the proposed area is of a suitable size the Council will be guided by the provisions of BS 5837: 2005. Phase 1 Habitat and Protected Species Survey – this is a requirement particularly due to the fact that the existing buildings on site are to be demolished and offer potential habitat for bats, and is in accordance with the requirements of EVR6 (Protection of Habitats) and EVR7 (Protection of Species) policy CS8 of the RCBLP Local Plan Core Strategy and the NPPF, as well as related primary legislation.

Phase1 Archaeology Survey – this is a desk-based survey designed to provide information on the known archaeological deposits within the development area and establish what impact the proposed development might have on any known resources. The survey should be carried out by a suitably qualified and experienced archaeological contractor. This will identify if any further archaeological work is required, in line with the NPPF and Policy EVR28 (Scheduled Ancient Monuments and Archaeological Sites) CS18 of the RCBLP Local Plan Core Strategy.

Ground Investigation Report - as the site is previously developed a ground investigation and contaminated land report is required to establish the ground conditions and whether any remedial measures are required to enable development to proceed. This will meet the requirements of Policy CS7 EVR15 (Contaminated Land) of the RCBLP Local Plan Core Strategy, and is in line with the guidance in the NPPF.

Heritage Assessment – to determine the significance of the heritage assets and context.


33

REFERENCES AND FURTHER INFORMATION

Replacement Chesterfield Borough Local Plan, July 2006 – Chesterfield Borough Council

Chesterfield Borough Council Local Plan – Core Strategy, July 2013 – Chesterfield Borough Council

Making Great Places Supplementary Planning Document, July 2013 – Chesterfield Borough Council

Sustainable Design Supplementary Planning Document, October 2008 – Chesterfield Borough Council

Affordable and Special Needs Housing Supplementary Planning Document, October 2007 – Chesterfield Borough Council

Designing out Crime Supplementary Planning Document, June 2007 – Chesterfield Borough Council

Open Space and Play Provision Supplementary Planning Document, September 2008 – Chesterfield Borough Council

Chesterfield Town Centre Masterplan, October 2009 - URBED and others for Chesterfield Borough Council

For more information on this planning brief, or to arrange pre-application discussions, please contact:

Alan Morey, Major Sites and Projects Officer, Regeneration

Town Hall, Rose Hill, Chesterfield, Derbyshire S40 1LP

01246 345371

[email protected]