Green Belt Assessment

Transcription

1 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base Green Belt Assessment September 2013

2 Contents 1 Introduction Background Study Area Objectives of the Green Belt Assessment Policy Context Introduction History of the Green Belt within Cheshire East National Green Belt Policy Regional Policy Local Policy Emerging Cheshire East Local Plan Policy Policy Context Summary Study Methodology Initial Stages Assessment of Exceptional Circumstances to Alter Green Belt Boundaries Identification of Potential Sustainable Locations for Development Identification of Strategic Parcels of Green Belt Land for Assessment Assessment of Strategic Parcels against the Purposes of Green Belt Review of the Exceptional Circumstances to Alter Green Belt Boundaries Introduction Housing Need and Growth North Cheshire Green Belt South Cheshire Green Belt Assessment Results: Strategic Parcels in the Green Belt Introduction Potential Sustainable Locations for Development Strategic Parcels of Land for Assessment Assessment of Parcels Summary and Recommendations Exceptional Circumstances Assessment of Land Within the Green Belt Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

3 Appendix A: Assessments of Strategic Parcels Alderley Edge Alsager Barthomley and Weston Bollington Chelford & Nether Alderley Congleton Disley Handforth High Legh Knutsford Macclesfield Mere and Bucklow Hill Mobberley Poynton Prestbury Radway Green Rode Heath Siddington Wilmslow Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

4 1 Introduction 1.1 Background Cheshire East Council is currently preparing a new Local Plan. There are a number of documents which collectively comprise the evidence base. These include: Climate Change and Sustainable Energy Planning Research; Determining The Settlement Hierarchy Background Report; Green Space Strategy; Green Infrastructure Framework and Green Infrastructure Action Plan for Crewe; Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation Assessment (in progress); Gypsy and Traveller Site Selection Study (in progress); Infrastructure Study; Landscape Character Assessment; Open Spaces Assessment; New Green Belt and Strategic Open Gaps Study; Population Projections and Forecasts Background Paper; Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment (PFRA); Renewable Energy Policy Study; Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA); Strategic Open Gaps and New Areas of Green Belt Study (in progress); Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA); Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) and Housing Needs Survey (in progress); Viability Testing; Waste Needs Assessment Report. This Green Belt Assessment also forms part of the evidence base. The Green Belt Assessment does not identify areas that are suitable for development and does not recommend whether any site should or should not be allocated for development. It simply seeks to establish whether exceptional circumstances exist that would justify the alteration of Green Belt boundaries and also assesses land against the five purposes of Green Belt as set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) which are: To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas; To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The National Planning Policy Framework identifies that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. The essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and permanence (NPPF para 79). The Green Belt is not a landscape designation. 3 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

5 1.2 Study Area The Borough of Cheshire East is in the North West of England and is bounded by Cheshire West and Chester to the west, Warrington and the Manchester conurbation to the north, Shropshire and the North Staffordshire conurbation of Stoke-on-Trent and Newcastle-under-Lyme to the south and the Peak District National Park to the east. Cheshire East is a new Borough, created as part of Local Government Reorganisation in 2009 and it covers the eastern part of the historic county of Cheshire. It is a large Borough, with many towns, villages and rural areas. The towns and villages vary greatly in character and face differing issues with different needs for the future. As such, Cheshire East currently has an emerging sense of place and identity. The Council is working on a new Local Plan that aims to contribute towards the creation of a coherent identity for the Borough. Cheshire East has 40,630 hectares of land designated as Green Belt, located in the northern and eastern parts of the Borough. These form part of the Green Belts surrounding Greater Manchester and the Potteries conurbations. The current Green Belt boundary is drawn tightly around settlements within the Green Belt leaving little space for future development. It is therefore appropriate to review whether these boundaries should be altered and to assess land in the Green Belt to determine the extent to which it continues to fulfil a Green Belt function. In addition, there is an area of locally-defined Green Gap primarily designated to prevent Crewe, Nantwich and a number of surrounding settlements from merging into one another. Assessment of this Green Gap area is excluded from this Green Belt Assessment and is considered elsewhere in the Local Plan evidence base. Figure 1.1: Map showing areas of Green Belt and Green Gap within Cheshire East 4 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

6 For the purpose of this study, any reference to Cheshire East should be taken to mean the geographical area covered by Cheshire East Borough Council except the part falling within the boundary of the Peak District National Park. Planning within the National Park is the responsibility of the Peak District National Park Authority. 1.3 Objectives of the Green Belt Assessment There are two main purposes to the Green Belt Assessment: 1. To assess whether there are exceptional circumstances that could justify alteration of the existing Green Belt boundary through the preparation of the Local Plan; and 2. To assess land in the Green Belt against the five purposes of Green Belt to identify areas that perform the strongest Green Belt function and those that perform a lesser Green Belt function; The review is strategic in nature and makes recommendations on whether exceptional circumstances exist to alter existing Green Belt boundaries. It assesses strategic parcels of land, within the current Green Belt to determine the extent to which each strategic parcel fulfils a Green Belt function. The review does not make recommendations on specific areas to include or exclude from the Green Belt. Decisions on future Green Belt boundaries will be determined through the Local Plan process following consideration of the results of this Green Belt Assessment alongside all other evidence, national policy and consultation responses. 5 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

7 2 Policy Context 2.1 Introduction This section sets out the policy context for assessment of the Green Belt and includes information of the history and purpose of Green Belt within Cheshire East in addition to current local, regional and national policies relating to the Green Belt. 2.2 History of the Green Belt within Cheshire East Cheshire East has 40,630 hectares of land designated as Green Belt, located in the northern and eastern parts of the Borough. These form part of the Green Belts surrounding Greater Manchester and the Potteries conurbations Draft Green Belt in Cheshire Draft Green Belts were defined in Cheshire and the former South Lancashire area in the late 1950s and early 1960s to: 1. Prevent the outward spread of development from Greater Manchester, Merseyside and the Potteries; and 2. Restrict the spread of development around the historic town of Chester. As both the Merseyside conurbation and the historic town of Chester are some distance from what is now the Borough of Cheshire East, it is considered that the original intent for the area of Green Belt in Cheshire East was to prevent the outward spread of development from Greater Manchester and the Potteries. These original draft Green Belt proposals were submitted to the Ministry of Housing and Local Government in 1961 and although they were not formally approved at this time, Green Belt control has been operated in the area concerned ever since submission. The regional framework was set by the Strategic Plan for the North West published in This advocated that development should be concentrated in the Mersey Valley, between the Merseyside and Greater Manchester conurbations, primarily to assist in the regeneration of these older areas. To achieve this, there was seen to be a need for a broad Green Belt. This approved regional strategy therefore supports the concept of Green Belts north and south of the Mersey Belt. The draft Green Belts in Cheshire included a substantial area in the north east of the county on the south side of the Manchester conurbation. This area encompasses land across the northern part of Macclesfield Borough including land surrounding the settlements of Knutsford, Wilmslow, Alderley Edge, Poynton and Disley. It also included a large area of land north of the Potteries conurbation up to Alsager and Congleton Extension of the Green Belt in the Cheshire Structure Plan The first Cheshire County Structure Plan approved in 1979 contained inter alia Policies for Rural Cheshire. Policy related to the definition of the Green Belts and stated: "13.39 There will be two broad areas of Green Belt in the County:- 6 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

8 Across the north of the county, from the vicinity of Chester, Neston and Ellesmere Port in the west, extending south of and between Runcorn and Warrington New Towns, north of Northwich, to the vicinity of Poynton, Disley and Macclesfield in the east; and In the south of the county between Alsager and Congleton, to link with the North Staffordshire Green Belt. The extent of the Green Belts is broadly depicted on the Key Diagram, and the boundaries will be defined precisely in local plans. The key diagram indicated that the approved Cheshire Structure Plan extended the earlier draft Green Belt to include land surrounding the town of Macclesfield as being within the broad extent of the North Cheshire Green Belt. The Secretary of State for the Environment approved the First Alteration Cheshire County Structure Plan on 29 th July Policy H5 related to the definition of the Green Belts, the geographical distribution of which remained unchanged from the approved County Structure Plan Definition of precise Green Belt Boundaries through Local Plans For the northern part of the Cheshire East Green Belt, precise boundaries were drawn up during the process of adopting Local Plans during the 1980s: Macclesfield Local Plan adopted April 1984; Poynton and Disley Local Plan adopted July 1985; Knutsford Area Local Plan adopted March 1987; Wilmslow Local Plan adopted January 1988 At the time of adoption, the Wilmslow Local Plan included two unallocated areas between the urban limits and the inner boundary of the Green Belt (areas now known as Safeguarded Land) which were intended to give flexibility and enable further allocations to be made in order to meet housing needs post As a result of this flexibility, the Wilmslow Local Plan considered that the boundaries of the Green Belt were intended to be permanent for at least 30 years i.e. up to at least 2017). The other Local Plans did not include any specific policies on unallocated land between the urban limits and inner boundary of the Green Belt and these plans did not specify a timescale over which the new Green Belt boundaries were intended to endure. Within South Cheshire, the then Cheshire County Council adopted the South Cheshire Green Belt Local Plan in August As the title suggests, this plan dealt only with the boundaries of the Green Belt in South Cheshire Adjustments to Green Belt in the Cheshire Replacement Structure Plan The Cheshire Replacement Structure Plan was approved by the Secretary of State for the Environment on 23 rd January The principal Structure Plan policy in respect of the Green Belt was Policy ENV3. The broad extent of the Green Belt remained unchanged. However, both the Examination in Public Panel and the Secretary of State considered the housing provision and the need to make an alteration to the Green Belt in Macclesfield. Given the development pressure at that time both to satisfy local need and need from outside the District, the Replacement Structure Plan approved by the Secretary of State on 23 rd January 1992 allowed for an adjustment to the Green Belt for the most part on the south side of the town of Macclesfield. 7 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

9 2.2.5 Detailed changes to Green Belt boundaries in the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan The draft Macclesfield Borough Local Plan published in 1994 proposed the release of a large area of Green Belt to the south and south-west of Macclesfield. Whilst the inspector was satisfied that exceptional circumstances existed to justify the release of Green Belt, he was not satisfied that they warranted such a large area of land to be excluded from the Green Belt. Consequently, the area to the south of the town (now known as the South Macclesfield Development Area) was removed from the Green Belt but the remaining area to the south west (between Congleton Road, Gawsworth Road and Chelford Road) remained as Green Belt. In approving Cheshire s Replacement Structure Plan (Cheshire 2011) the Secretary of State indicated that local plans should consider adjustment to the Green Belt around Macclesfield, along the Staffordshire boundary and as part of a review of Chester s development needs evaluate the scale, nature and choices for development of the City. The Cheshire 2011 Replacement Structure Plan was adopted in 1999 with an extension of the Green Belt to include Frodsham, Helsby and Lordship Marshes and no reduction in the broad extent of the Green Belts elsewhere in Cheshire Extension to the South Cheshire Green Belt Policy NE.1 of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Local Plan (Adopted 13 th November 1997) was concerned with the extension of the South Cheshire Green Belt: The South Cheshire Green Belt will be extended into that part of the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich which is defined on the proposals map. Justification: To implement the Secretary of State s decision that a firm defensible boundary be identified for the North Staffordshire Green Belt, and although not specifically mentioned in his decision letter, for the South Cheshire Green Belt as well. To complement green belt designations and policies in neighbouring authorities as part of the strategy to assist urban regeneration in Crewe and the Potteries. There is no further information recorded on the history of this proposal, but it is believed that prior to this decision by the Secretary of State, the South Cheshire Green Belt existed only in the former Congleton Borough. The outer extent of the North Staffordshire Green Belt where it met the former Borough of Crewe and Nantwich is believed to have been the county boundary. Therefore, it is considered that South Cheshire Green Belt was extended to include the area around Barthomley and Weston by the Secretary of State sometime in the 1990s and confirmed in the 1997 Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Local Plan Review of Original Purposes The main purpose of the Green Belt in Cheshire East was to prevent the outward spread of development from Greater Manchester, Merseyside and the Potteries. North Cheshire retains a close socio-economic relationship with the Manchester conurbation as the area of South Cheshire covered by Green Belt designation does with the Potteries. This original purpose is still considered to be the key purpose of the Green Belt today, although this needs to be considered in light of enlarged travel-to-work areas and increased personal mobility. As a result, the outward spread of development is not necessarily confined to the edges of the conurbations and could occur 8 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

10 throughout the Green Belt area. As a result, separation between settlements within the extent of the Green Belt and maintenance of the open areas between them is also of great importance. 2.3 National Green Belt Policy The national policy framework relating to Green Belts is set out in the National Planning Policy Framework. One of the core planning principles identified in paragraph 17 is to take account of the different roles and character of different areas, promoting the vitality of our main urban areas, protecting the Green Belts around them, recognising the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside and supporting thriving rural communities within it. Under the NPPF (para 79), the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. The essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence. Green Belt serves five purposes (as set out in NPPF para 80): To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas; To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land NPPF Paragraph 83 relates to Green Belt boundaries. Once established, Green Belt boundaries should only be altered in exceptional circumstances, through the preparation or review of the Local Plan. At that time, authorities should consider the Green Belt boundaries having regard to their intended permanence in the long term, so that they should be capable of enduring beyond the plan period. Consequently, if Green Belt boundary alterations are proposed, it will be necessary to consider potential development needs well into the future. When drawing up or reviewing Green Belt boundaries, local planning authorities should take account of the need to promote sustainable patterns of development and consider the consequences for sustainable development of channelling development towards urban areas inside the Green Belt boundary or towards locations beyond the outer Green Belt boundary. Whilst this study does not look at defining new boundaries, it is important to look at the possibilities for directing development towards urban areas inside the Green Belt (i.e. within Greater Manchester, the Potteries and urban areas within Cheshire East inset into the Green Belt) when considering whether there are exceptional circumstances to justify the alteration of Green Belt boundaries. At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking (para 14). For plan-making this means that: Local planning authorities should positively seek opportunities to meet the development needs of their area; 9 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

11 Local Plans should meet objectively assessed needs, with sufficient flexibility to adapt to rapid change, unless: o Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this Framework taken as a whole; or o Specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted The footnote to this paragraph in the NPPF explicitly notes that land designated as Green Belt can be considered as a specific policy to indicate development can be restricted. This is also an important factor when considering whether there are exceptional circumstances to justify the alteration of Green Belt boundaries. The NPPF (para 47) is clear that local planning authorities should look to significantly boost the supply of housing. Having considered the evidence base, the Local Plan should meet the full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in the housing market area, as far as is consistent with the policies set out in the NPPF. Although this study does not look at potential changes to the Green Belt boundary, it is useful to consider the requirements for defining boundaries, particularly in relation to the requirements for safeguarded land as set out in NPPF para 85: When defining boundaries, local planning authorities should: ensure consistency with the Local Plan strategy for meeting identified requirements for sustainable development; not include land which it is unnecessary to keep permanently open; where necessary, identify in their plans areas of safeguarded land between the urban area and the Green Belt, in order to meet longer-term development needs stretching well beyond the plan period; make clear that the safeguarded land is not allocated for development at the present time. Planning permission for the permanent development of safeguarded land should only be granted following a Local Plan review which proposes the development; satisfy themselves that Green Belt boundaries will not need to be altered at the end of the development plan period; and define boundaries clearly, using physical features that are readily recognisable and likely to be permanent. Villages should only be included in the Green Belt if it is necessary to restrict development primarily because of the important contribution that the open character of the village makes to the openness of the Green Belt. 2.4 Regional Policy The North West of England Regional Spatial Strategy and remaining Cheshire Structure Plan policies were revoked on 20 th May 2013 by The Regional Strategy for the North West (Revocation) Order Consequently, the Regional Spatial Strategy is no longer part of the statutory development plan for Cheshire East. 10 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

12 Whilst the Regional Spatial Strategy has been abolished, it is useful to briefly consider what conclusions were drawn from its evidence base at the time. Policy RDF4 of the NWRSS related specifically to Green Belts. Overall, the general extent of the Region s Green Belt will be maintained (over the plan period to 2021). Within Cheshire, there is no need for any exceptional substantial strategic change to Green Belt boundaries before 2011, and a presumption against exceptional strategic change after Where exceptional strategic change is necessary, policy RDF4 required that the Regional Planning Body (now defunct) together with relevant stakeholder should investigate the need for change and options for implementation. Any other local detailed boundary changes should be examined by the Local Development Framework process (now the Local Plan process). The NWRSS did not envisage any exceptional substantial change would be required to the Green Belt in the North West to 2021 but did recognise that other, more location specific detailed boundary changes may be required to meet exceptional circumstances. 2.5 Local Policy Local policy relating to Green Belt consists of saved policies from: Macclesfield Borough Local Plan (adopted January 2004); Congleton Borough Local Plan First Review (adopted January 2005); and Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan (adopted February 2005) Macclesfield Borough Local Plan (adopted January 2004) The Plan states that the object of planning policy in a Green Belt is to keep land open and keep levels of activity at a minimum. Thus it is the intention that a Green Belt shall have a rural character and restrictions on building are severe. The Macclesfield Borough Local Plan covered the period to 2011, although a number of policies have been saved in perpetuity by Direction from the Secretary of State. These include policy GC1 Green Belt New Buildings which prevents the construction of new buildings in the Green Belt, except under very special circumstances or for one of the specified purposes. These purposes include: Limited infilling within the settlements of Gawsworth, Henbury, Lyme Green and Sutton provided that the development is in scale and character with the settlement in question; and Limited affordable housing for local community needs. Policy GC4 Developed Sites in the Green Belt allows for limited infilling and redevelopment at a number of identified major developed sites that are washed over by the Green Belt. Other Green Belt policies in the Macclesfield Borough Local Plan were not saved as they were considered to be a repeat of national policy Congleton Borough Plan First Review (adopted January 2005) Within the Congleton Local Plan, the defined purpose of Green Belt is to check the unrestrained growth of the built-up area and to safeguard the countryside against further encroachment. 11 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

13 The Plan covered the period up to 2011 but a number of its policies have also been saved under a Direction from the Secretary of State. Policy PS7 Green Belt prevents development within the Green Belt unless for one of the specified purposes which include: New dwellings in accordance with policy H6; Controlled infilling in Astbury, Lawton Gate, Red Bull and The Bank; Limited affordable housing for local needs; Limited types of employment development; Re-use of existing rural buildings. Policy E6 relates to employment development in the Green Belt and policy H6 allows for agricultural workers dwellings, replacement dwellings, conversion of existing buildings and limited affordable housing. Policy H16 addresses extensions to dwellings in the Green Belt, H17 with extensions to residential curtilage and policy S9 limits new shopping development in the Green Belt to farm shops that assist with rural diversification and local shops within settlements where infill is acceptable Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Replacement Local Plan (adopted February 2005) This Plan seeks no loss of Green Belt land to built development except in very special circumstances. It notes that there is a need for very strict protection of the openness of land included within the Green Belt in order to achieve the land use objectives of the Green Belt. At the same time, it does recognise that policy must allow for appropriate new uses and development including the need for farmers and others to diversify their enterprises. As with the other relevant Local Plans, the Borough of Crewe and Nantwich Local Plan covers the period to 2011, although a number of its policies have also been saved under a Direction from the Secretary of State including its Green Belt policy. Policy NE.1 seeks to prevent inappropriate development in the Green Belt except in very special circumstances. It also allows for the re-use of buildings within the Green Belt subject to a number of criteria. In addition, policy RES.11 ensures that extensions to dwellings in the Green Belt must be subordinate to the original building and policy RES.13 states that new sites for Gypsies and Travellers should not be located in the Green Belt. 2.6 Emerging Cheshire East Local Plan Policy Cheshire East Council is working to produce a Core Strategy as part of its Local Plan. There have already been consultations on issues and options; a place-shaping consultation looking at local issues in each of the larger towns; rural issues; minerals issues; town strategies to help identify local priorities; and consultation on a overall development strategy and policy principles including a separate consultation on some additional sites that have been submitted through the consultation process so far. Emerging policy relating to the Green Belt in Cheshire East is set out in the Development Strategy and Policy Principles documents. One of the identified objectives for the new Local Plan is to establish Green Belt boundaries that take into account the need to promote sustainable patterns of development and that address longer term development needs stretching beyond the plan period. 12 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

14 To achieve sustainable development in the future, it is considered that some development may be necessary within the Green Belt. To avoid the need for further alterations to the Green Belt boundary in the future, the Local Plan will also need to identify areas of land to remove from the Green Belt and safeguard. This safeguarded land may be required to meet the longer term development needs beyond the end of the plan period (2030). The NPPF (para 85) is clear that safeguarded land is not allocated for development at the present time and can only be allocated as part of a Local Plan review. The Cheshire East emerging policy envisages that, other than detailed boundary changes to accommodate new development, the general extent of the existing Green Belt will be maintained and it also advocates consideration of a new area of Green Belt to preserve the setting and special character of the historic town of Nantwich and to prevent it merging with Crewe and surrounding villages. The potential for designating a new Green Belt does not form part of this review of the existing Green Belt and will be considered separately. This Green Belt study will form part of the evidence base for the Core Strategy and together with other evidence documents (such as those relating to the overall development requirements for the area, landscape assessment, constraints mapping and sustainability appraisals), the results of all the consultation exercises carried out, and national policy and guidance, will inform decisions on whether or not it is appropriate to release sites from the Green Belt, and if so, which sites would be more appropriate than others. 2.7 Policy Context Summary The broad extent of Green Belt within Cheshire East was first drafted in the late 1950s and early 1960s to prevent the outward spread of development from Greater Manchester, Merseyside and the Potteries. This original purpose is still considered key, but maintaining the separation between settlements within the extent of the Green Belt is also important. Detailed boundaries were defined throughout the 1980s and the south Cheshire Green Belt extended in the early 1990s and there is not considered to be a need for a strategic review of the general extent of the Green Belt (although proposals for a new area of Green Belt in South Cheshire will be considered separately within the Local Plan evidence base). The NPPF sets out the five purposes of Green Belts and these purposes will form the basis of the assessments to determine which areas fulfil the strongest Green belt function and which areas serve a lesser Green Belt function. 13 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

15 3 Study Methodology This section sets out the methodology used to carry out the Green Belt Assessment. 3.1 Initial Stages To begin the review, an assessment of local, regional and national policies relevant to the Green Belt was carried out, alongside a consideration of the history of the Green Belt in Cheshire including the original reasons for designating Green Belt locally. 3.2 Assessment of Exceptional Circumstances to Alter Green Belt Boundaries The NPPF (para 14) establishes a presumption in favour of sustainable development. For planmaking, this means that: Local Plans should meet objectively assessed needs, with sufficient flexibility to adapt to rapid change, unless: Any adverse impacts of doing so would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits, when assessed against the policies in this framework taken as a whole; or Specific policies in this Framework indicate development should be restricted In addition, NPPF (para 83) requires that Green Belt boundaries are only altered in exceptional circumstances, through the preparation of the Local Plan. A full assessment of the evidence base has been carried out to determine: a) Whether it is possible to meet the objectively assessed needs without incursions into the Green Belt; and b) If not, whether the requirement to meet the objectively assessed needs has the potential to be considered as exceptional circumstances to justify alterations to the Green Belt boundary. Evidence base documents providing information on development needs as well as land supply and considered in this assessment include: Strategic Housing Market Assessment Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment Employment Land Review Cheshire East Retail Study Background Paper Population Projections and Forecasts Department for Communities and Local Government Household Projections Data available from the 2011 Census 3.3 Identification of Potential Sustainable Locations for Development The Green Belt in Cheshire East extends to over 400 square kilometres. As such, it was important to reduce the size of the study area and discount areas where change is unlikely. Areas for further investigation were selected for their potential to provide future sustainable locations for development. 14 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

16 The results of the Council's Determining the Settlement Hierarchy study were used to determine the most sustainable settlements within Cheshire East. Green Belt areas adjacent to Principal Towns, Key Service Centres and Local Service Centres could potentially be sustainable locations for development. In addition, there was a need to consider whether any other areas could deliver sustainable new settlements or urban extensions. Areas were identified where there are potential significant development pressures, of a scale that could deliver a sufficient level of development to provide and support a comprehensive range of facilities and services for their future residents and therefore be considered sustainable settlements. Areas of potential significant development pressure were defined as areas with significant clusters of sites submitted to the Council's Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment and areas with proposed and alternative strategic sites set out in the Council's Development Strategy. 3.4 Identification of Strategic Parcels of Green Belt Land for Assessment Having determined the broad areas within which to assess the extent to which land fulfils the five purposes of Green Belt, it was necessary to identify strategic parcels of land within these areas for assessment. Firstly, a mapping exercise was carried out to identify key constraints that would automatically rule out development. Although this review is clear that it does not consider whether any strategic parcel or any site is suitable for development, it was considered appropriate to exclude areas where it is certain that development would be unacceptable. These key constraints mapped are: European designations: Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) and Ramsar Sites; National designations: National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and National Nature Reserves (NNRs) These constraints are shown in Figure Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

17 Figure 3.1: European and National Designations Other constraints (such as flood risk, landscape character etc) may well preclude development in other areas, but given the strategic nature of this review, it cannot be certain that these constraints could not be overcome and further, more detailed work would be required in these areas if sites were proposed to be removed from the Green Belt and allocated for development. Following the mapping of constraints, an initial sieving process was undertaken so that strategic parcels of land were not considered: 16 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

18 Within areas, or close to areas, that have European designations such as Special Protection Areas (SPAs), Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) or Ramsar sites; and Within areas that have national designations such as National Parks, Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) and National Nature Reserves (NNRs). Following this initial sieving process, strategic parcels were identified for further, more detailed assessment. Green Belt parcels were identified by: Ensuring strategic parcel boundaries do not cross significant barriers such as motorways, rail lines, noteworthy watercourses or significant areas of woodland. Considering other constraints to their development such as topography, flood risk and nature conservation designations. Making sure strategic parcels are of consistently similar character and land use for Green Belt purposes Aerial photography, Ordnance Survey maps and Geographical Information Systems (GIS) were used to identify these parcels of land. At the end of the process each of the parcels were mapped and assigned a unique reference number. The boundaries of these parcels were given careful consideration so that they could provide a robust and defensible boundary over time. The integrity of the Green Belt can be seriously compromised where Green Belt boundaries are constantly changing. Furthermore, public confidence in Green Belt policies is very largely dependent on their certainty and their longevity. Strong Boundaries Motorway Main road Railway line (in use) Rivers, streams and canals Protected woodland Protected hedges Residential, employment or other development with strong established boundaries Prominent topography Moderate Weak Boundaries Private road Disused railway lines Brooks and culverted watercourses Non protected woodlands, trees and hedges Field boundaries Open space boundaries Residential, employment or other development with weak or intermediate established boundaries Power lines Public footpath Figure 3.2: Robust and Defensible Green Belt Boundaries For completeness, two areas of land designated as 'Safeguarded Land', that lie between the Green Belt and urban area in Wilmslow and Handforth were also included in the study despite not currently being in the Green Belt. 3.5 Assessment of Strategic Parcels against the Purposes of Green Belt A key objective of the review was to assess the strategic Green Belt parcels in the context of the National Planning Policy Framework and the five purposes of the Green Belt. The National Planning Policy Framework (para. 80) identifies five purposes of the Green Belt: 17 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

19 To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas; To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. The fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open. The essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and permanence (NPPF para 79). Keeping land permanently open is therefore a key consideration in the overall assessment of each site, as openness is so critical to the Green Belt. The NPPF does not further define the five purposes or set out how they should be assessed, although it is clear that the Framework does not give any particular weighting to the different purposes. The following table sets out the broad criteria that have been used in the assessment of how each strategic parcel fulfils the five Green Belt purposes. Green Belt Purpose (as set out in NPPF) 1) To check the unrestricted sprawl of large built up areas 2) To prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another 3) To assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment Suggested broad criteria used in review What role does the strategic parcel play in preventing ribbon development and non compact development? What role does the strategic parcel play in preventing towns from merging and narrowing the gap between them? Would a reduction in the gap between the towns compromise the openness of the Green Belt land? What is the width of the gap? Are there clear strong and robust boundaries to contain development and prevent encroachment in the long term? Are there already significant urbanising influences? 4) To preserve the setting and special character of historic towns 5) To assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land Has there already been encroachment by built development? This purpose has been screened out as the original reasons for designating the Cheshire Green Belt were to prevent the outward spread of development from the adjacent conurbations and to restrict the spread of development around the historic town of Chester (which is outside of the study area). It is considered (at least in terms of Green Belt policy) that none of the settlements in the study area are classed as historic towns. This purpose has also been screened out as it could be applied equally to all land in the Green Belt. Figure 3.3: Broad Assessment Criteria for Strategic Parcels within the Green Belt 18 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

20 It is considered that purpose number 5 can be screened out of the assessment as it could be applied equally to all land in the Green Belt. Given that Chester (outside of the study area) is the only historic town specifically mentioned at the time of designating the Cheshire Green Belt, purpose number 4 can also be screened out from the assessment. The difference between sprawl and encroachment is not always clear. The Tewkesbury, Gloucester and Cheltenham Green Belt Assessment used the dictionary definitions of these terms to support their assessment criteria and these are repeated here. Sprawl is defined as the straggling expansion of an urban or industrial area, irregular or straggling form, spread out over a large area in an untidy or irregular way ; Encroachment is defined as intrude, advance gradually beyond an acceptable or established limit. When assessing strategic parcels of land against the purpose of Green Belt, it was considered appropriate to use the criteria set out in Table 3.2 supported by these definitions. When revising Green Belt boundaries, the NPPF requires that local planning authorities should define boundaries clearly, using physical feature that are readily recognisable and likely to be permanent. When assessing strategic parcels of land, consideration was also given to other factors including: Existing land use; Proximity and relationship to the built-up area; Degree of openness / enclosure; Distance and visual connection to historic urban centres / key urban areas; and Relationship with the countryside For each strategic parcel, the results of the assessment were recorded in a matrix. An individual assessment against each of the purposes of Green Belt was made along with a categorisation: Strategic parcel makes a major contribution to Green Belt purposes; Strategic parcel makes a significant contribution to Green Belt purposes; Strategic parcel makes a contribution to Green Belt purposes; In addition to this individual assessment against each purpose, an overall assessment (using the categories above) and written evaluation using professional judgement was made. In some cases, a combination of the findings on each purpose may be used to inform the overall evaluation and in other cases there may be one overriding purpose that is deemed critical to the overall assessment. The NPPF identifies that the fundamental aim of Green Belt policy is to prevent urban sprawl by keeping land permanently open and that the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and permanence. Despite this, it does not identify any of the five purposes as being more important than the others, and in the absence of any clear guidance or consistent examples of good practice in this area, it was not considered appropriate for this review to weight the purposes as some other studies have done. In Cheshire, the primary reasons for defining the Green Belt are recorded to be: 19 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

21 1. To prevent the outward spread of development from Greater Manchester, Merseyside and the Potteries; and 2. To restrict the spread of development around the historic town of Chester. The professional judgement applied to the assessments allows for consideration of this primary purpose, and in some cases, for example where the strategic parcel is part of a narrow gap between the outer edge of one of the conurbations and the edge of a Cheshire settlement, this is considered to be an overriding factor in the overall assessment. The purpose of the assessments is not to make recommendations on the location of potential Green Belt release, but rather they serve to identify those areas where the purposes of Green Belt are weaker and boundaries for the long-term might merit redefinition should the land be required during the next plan period (to 2030) or in the longer term. Potential release of sites within the identified strategic parcels will be considered through the Local Plan process in the context of a range of planning, sustainability and landscape issues having been informed by the Local Plan evidence base as a whole, not just the Green Belt Assessment. 20 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

22 4 Review of the Exceptional Circumstances to Alter Green Belt Boundaries 4.1 Introduction Within Cheshire East, there are significant identified needs for market and affordable housing, as well as for new employment land provision. It is considered that in the north of the Borough, these needs cannot be met from towns and villages inset within the Green Belt boundary, or from urban areas inside the Green Belt boundary. Directing additional development to meet these needs to locations beyond the outer Green Belt boundary would lead to unsustainable patterns of development and would not provide sufficient new development in the areas of need. The requirements to allocate sufficient land for the development of market and affordable housing, and for employment development to meet the identified needs in the north of the Borough are considered to constitute exceptional circumstances that justify the alteration of Green Belt boundaries through the preparation of the Local Plan. 4.2 Housing Need and Growth The need for growth in Cheshire East is set out throughout the Local Plan evidence base and within the Council s Development Strategy. Growth in Cheshire East is both necessary and beneficial for the following reasons: To increase the number of jobs To make Cheshire East attractive for inward investment Recognition of Cheshire East as a good place to live with a high quality of life where people are attracted to live and work To deliver key regeneration projects Construction as an important part of the economy, creating jobs and boosting GDP To have a workforce that can support an ageing population To enable our own young people to stay in Cheshire East, substantial new housing is needed to meet local needs A strong economy offering sustainable growth is essential in maintaining the Borough s prosperity in a fast changing world. However it is important that economic growth is within environmental limits and improves the social conditions. An adequate supply of housing plays a fundamental role in building a successful economy. Despite the current economic recession, evidence shows that demand for housing over the next twenty years will outstrip supply unless we substantially increase the amount of new housing provided through the Local Plan; in particular housing that meets local needs and is affordable. One of the core planning principles set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (para 19) is that the planning system should: 'proactively drive and support sustainable economic development to deliver the homes, businesses and industrial units, infrastructure and thriving local places that the country needs. Every effort should be made objectively to identify and then meet the housing, business and other development needs of an area, and respond positively to wider opportunities for growth. Plans should take account of market signals, such as land prices and housing affordability, and set out a 21 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

23 clear strategy for allocating sufficient land which is suitable for development in their area, taking into account the needs of the residential and business communities'. The extent to which a location provides access to markets and a skilled workforce will impact on attracting inward investment into an area. Individuals make decisions on where they wish to live taking into account the quality of housing and the environment. Consequently the availability of good housing and high quality environments influence decisions about business location, investment and growth. If we do not provide sufficient housing, economic growth will be constrained because new businesses will decide not to locate in Cheshire East, whilst house prices will increase, exacerbating the affordability problem. In areas of high cost housing, employers have particular difficulty in recruiting to lower paid posts which restricts economic growth. The consequences may be significant in personal and environmental terms with lower paid workers being forced to live in areas of cheaper housing outside Cheshire East but travelling long distances into the Borough to work. Housing development also makes an important contribution to the local economy in its own right. It creates employment opportunities for construction workers and also generates increased retail expenditure in the local community. The Centre for Economics and Business Research has estimated that if new housebuilding across the UK were to rise to 300,000 annually by 2015 (95,000 new houses were built in 2010), it would add some 201,000 extra permanent jobs in construction and contribute 75 billion to the UK's Gross Domestic Product. In addition to the economic benefits of housing growth, there are significant social reasons to provide new housing. These reflect the particular local need of Cheshire East and include: The population of Cheshire East has grown by 5.2% to 370,100 people between 2001 and 2011 and a similar rate of growth is forecast over the next twenty years. The number of households is expected to increase by 24% from 154,000 to 191,000 by 2030 (Cheshire East Strategic Housing Market Assessment, 2010). Office for National Statistics 2010 projections show that there will be a requirement in Cheshire East for 1,600 new dwellings every year. The demand for affordable housing. Across Cheshire East there is an identified need for 1,243 affordable homes each year (Cheshire East Strategic Housing Market Assessment, 2010). The projected and substantial increase in residents over the age of 65 means that there will be an increased demand for particular types of housing (such as bungalows) to the extent that demand will outstrip supply. The social housing waiting list shows that across Cheshire East 10,952 people have applied for social housing (Housing Waiting List, May 2012). Of these, 9,889 have local connection in Cheshire East. The need to increase the proportion of the population of working age through in-migration to ensure we have a viable working population. To ensure the managed release of sufficient land for development to meet the objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing, in accordance with the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework. 22 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

24 Further evidence on the need for new housing is set out elsewhere in the Local Plan evidence base. Having considered the evidence, the Development Strategy proposes that a minimum of 27,000 homes be provided between 2010 and 2030, plus a minimum of 300ha of land for business, general industry and storage and distribution uses. 4.3 North Cheshire Green Belt The Green Belt in the north of the Borough is drawn very tightly around existing settlements. With the exception of two areas of safeguarded land (total circa 22ha) in the Wilmslow and Handforth area, there is very little room for expansion of settlements without incursions into the Green Belt. The Green Belt has been a very successful instrument in limiting the expansion of urban areas and encouraging the recycling of derelict and other urban land. In addition, many of the settlements do not have a significant industrial heritage and are not blighted by large areas of derelict industrial land. Consequently, there are not sufficient genuinely deliverable sites to deliver enough market and affordable housing to meet the identified housing needs Housing Need The north of Borough is recognised as a dynamic, successful and desirable area with high demand for new housing and at present has a significant level of pent-up demand; The 2010 Strategic Housing Market Assessment shows that open market housing in Cheshire East is relatively unaffordable. When considering the ratio of lower-quartile incomes to lower-quartile house prices, Cheshire East was the 8 th least affordable Borough in the North West. The proportion of households in Cheshire East that could afford the lower quartile (LQ) house price was 35.8% (Source: Land Registry 2009 Household Survey). Within the towns and villages inset into the North Cheshire Green Belt, this figure ranged from 10.0% in Prestbury to 47.5% in Wilmslow and Alderley Edge. Sub-area Lower Quartile Median Income required to afford LQ Price Income required to afford median price % households who could afford LQ price Prestbury 290, ,000 82, , % 7.9% Poynton 180, ,000 51,429 66, % 6.9% Macclesfield 183, ,972 52,286 71, % 6.1% Rural Knutsford 173, ,000 49,626 68, % 6.4% Town Knutsford 200, ,500 57,143 83, % 6.2% Rural Disley 141, ,000 40,286 53, % 14.4% Macclesfield 115, ,000 32,857 42, % 24.8% and Bollington Wilmslow and Alderley Edge 160, ,000 45,714 68, % 8.8% Figure 4.1: Housing Affordability. Source: Land Registry 2009 Household Survey % households who could afford median price The SHMA shows an overall annual requirement for 2,753 open market dwellings and 1,243 affordable dwellings across Cheshire East. This includes a shortfall of 555 affordable dwellings per annum in the former Macclesfield District. The SHMA considers general market supply and demand in each of the identified sub-areas (Disley, Knutsford Rural, Knutsford Town, Macclesfield and Bollington; Macclesfield Rural; Poynton; Prestbury; and Wilmslow and Alderley Edge). Within these 23 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)

25 sub-areas, demand exceeds supply for all sizes of property in all of the sub-areas, except for twobedroom properties in Macclesfield and Bollington, and one and four-bedroom properties in Prestbury. Demand generally exceeds supply for each type of property with some exceptions as shown in Figure 4.2 below. It is notable that demand exceeds supply for all types of property in Disley, Knutsford Town, Poynton and Wilmslow and Alderley Edge. Figure 4.2: Review of General Market Housing Supply and Demand. Source: Cheshire East SHMA 2010 The number of households in need varies across the area and ranges from 2.4% (50 households) in Prestbury to 8.0% (158 households) in Disley. Sub-area No. households in need Total no. households % households in need Disley 158 1, % Knutsford Rural 271 5, % Knutsford Town 456 5, % Macclesfield & Bollington 1,278 26, % Macclesfield Rural 153 4, % Poynton 357 6, % Prestbury 50 2, % Wilmslow and Alderley Edge , % Figure 4.3: Households in need by sub-area. Source: 2009 Household Survey / 2010 SHMA This need can be for a variety of reasons as shown in Figure 4.4 below. Category Homeless households or with insecure tenure Mismatch of housing need and dwellings Dwelling amenities and condition Social needs Factor N1 Under notice, real threat of notice or lease coming to an end N2 Too expensive, and in receipt of housing benefit or in arrears due to expense N3 Overcrowded according to the bedroom standard model N4 Too difficult to maintain N5 Couples, people with children and single adults over 25 sharing a kitchen bathroom or WC with another household N6 Household containing people with mobility impairment or other special needs living in unsuitable accommodation N7 Lacks a bathroom, kitchen or inside WC and household does not have resource to make fit N8 Subject to major disrepair or unfitness and household does not have resource to make fit N9 Harassment or threats of harassment from neighbours or others living in the vicinity which cannot be resolved except through a move Figure 4.4: Reasons for housing need 24 Cheshire East Local Plan Evidence Base: Green Belt Assessment (Sep 2013)