Rossendale Borough Council Core Strategy: The … · Sustainability Appraisal of the Core Stra tegy...

Rossendale Borough Council Sustainability Appraisal of the Core Strategy Publication Version – Main Report

1

Rossendale Borough Council Core Strategy: The Proposed

Way Forward (Publication Version)

Sustainability Appraisal Main Report November 2010


Rossendale Borough Council Core Strategy: The Proposed Way Forward (Publication Version)

Sustainability Appraisal - Main Report

November 2010 Notice This document and its contents have been prepared and are intended solely for Rossendale Borough Council’s information and use in relation to the Core Strategy Development Plan Document Sustainability Appraisal.

Atkins assumes no responsibility to any other party in respect of or arising out of or in connection with this document and/or its contents.

Document History

JOB NUMBER: 5094442 DOCUMENT REF: 10 11 03 Main Report Rossendale CS SA Publication FINAL with tracks.docx

3 Final Issue SM AG AG/CW CW 03.11.10

2 Revised Draft for Client Comments

SM AG AG/CW CW 13.09.10

1 Draft for Client Comments LP/SM AG AG CW 15.07.10

Revision Purpose Description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date


Contents Section Page Non Technical Summary i

Overview of Process and Purpose of Sustainability Appraisal i Contents and Main Objectives of the Core Strategy ii Sustainability Baseline and Key Issues iv Sustainability Appraisal Framework v Compatibility between Core Strategy and SA Objectives v Mitigation vi Monitoring vi Conclusions vii

1. Introduction 1 Local Development Framework 1 Rossendale Core Strategy DPD 1 Geographical Area and Main Characteristics 2 Requirement for Sustainability Appraisal 4 Summary of SA to Date 9 Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) 9 Consultation 10

2. Methodology 11 Stage A: Setting the Context and Objectives, Establishing the Baseline and Deciding on Scope 11 Stage B: Developing and Defining Options 12 Assessment of Strategic Options and Preferred Option 12 Assessment of Core Strategy Policies (2010) 14 Stage C: Preparing the Sustainability Appraisal Report 17 Stage D: Consulting on the Draft Plan and Sustainability Appraisal Report 17 Meeting the requirements of the SEA Directive 18

3. Setting the Policy Context and Establishing the Baseline 20 Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna 20 Land Resources 25 Water Quality and Resources 31 Air Quality 34 Climatic Factors and Flooding 38 Heritage and Landscape 43 Community Health and Equality, Leisure and Education 48 Local Economy and Employment, including Tourism 53 Transportation 58 Housing 60

4. Key Sustainability Issues and Opportunities 64 Key Sustainability Issues and Opportunities for the LDF Strategy Areas 68

5. Sustainability Appraisal Framework 71


Introduction 71 Sustainability Appraisal Framework 71 Predicted Future Trends 82

6. Compatibility Assessment of Core Strategy Objectives against SA Objectives 95 Testing the Spatial Vision and Strategic Objectives 95 Final Vision and Spatial Objectives 96

7. Assessment of Strategic Options and Preferred Policies (November 2009) 99 Introduction 99 Preferred Options Screening and Assessment 99 Assessment of Strategic Options 113

8. Assessment of Publication Core Strategy Policies (September 2010) 120 Assessment Results: Strategy Components (1-6) 164 Assessment Results: Topic-based Components 168 Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects 180

9. Mitigation 185

10. Monitoring 186 Introduction 186

11. Conclusions 196

12. Glossary and References 198 Glossary 198 References 200

List of Tables

Table 2.1 - Sustainability Effects Scoring 15 Table 2.2 - Sustainability Assessment Scoring 16 Table 2.3 - Schedule of SEA Requirements 18 Table 3.1 – Air Quality Objectives included in Regulations for the purpose of Local Air Quality Management

in England. 36 Table 3.2 – Results of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tubes 36 Table 4.1 – Key Sustainability Issues 64 Table 4.2 – Issues and Opportunities in Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth 68 Table 4.3 – Issues and Opportunities in Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir 68 Table 4.4 - Issues and Opportunities in Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water 69 Table 4.5 - Issues and Opportunities in Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough 69 Table 4.6 - Issues and Opportunities in South-West Rossendale 70 Table 4.7 - Issues and Opportunities in Haslingden and Rising Bridge 70 Table 5.1 –SA Framework 72 Table 5.2 - SA Baseline Condition and Future Trends Summary 84 Table 6.1 – Core Strategy Publication Version Vision and Strategic Objectives 96 Table 6.2 – Assessing the Core Strategy Objectives against the SA framework (extract from SA Report, 2009

(Scott Wilson)) 98 Table 7.1 - Summary List of Preferred Options in ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy document 100 Table 7.2 – Summary of SA results by Topic (Scott Wilson 2009) 101 Table 7.3 – Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna 102 Table 7.4 – Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Land Resources 103


Table 7.5 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Water Quality and Resources 104 Table 7.6 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Air Quality 105 Table 7.7 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Climatic Factors and Flooding 106 Table 7.8 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Heritage and Landscape 107 Table 7.9 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Community Health and Equality, Leisure

and Education 108 Table 7.10 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Local Economy and Employment,

including Tourism 109 Table 7.11 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Transportation 111 Table 7.12 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Housing 112 Table 8.1 – Core Strategy Policy Assessment Components 122 Table 8.2 – Summary of Significance of Direct Effects of the Core Strategy Policies 178 Table 8.3 - Summary of Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects 181 Table 10.1 – Monitoring 187

List of Figures

Figure 1.1 - Rossendale Character Areas 4 Figure 1.2 - Five-stage approach to SA 5 Figure 1.3 - SA Process – How it fits into the process of preparing a DPD 8 Figure 3.1 - Healey Dell Local Nature Reserve and Sites of Specific Scientific Importance in the Rossendale

Borough 25 Figure 3.2 - Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological sites in Lancashire 29 Figure 3.3 - Groundwater Vulnerability – Minor Aquifers in Rossendale (Source: Rossendale Borough

Council – Level 1 SFRA) 30 Figure 3.4 - Rossendale Watercourses (Source: Rossendale Borough Council) 33 Figure 3.5 - Flood zones within Rossendale 43 Figure 3.6 - Green Belt Land in Rossendale 47

Appendices (separate volume) Appendix A – Context Review

Appendix B - Consultation Responses

Appendix C - Topic Areas and the SA Framework Objectives

Appendix D - Core Strategy Alternative Options and ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Preferred Options Assessment (November 2009)

Appendix E – Revisions to the Sustainability Appraisal Framework for the 2010 Core Strategy Policies Assessment

Appendix F – Bespoke Consultation Sustainability Appraisal (May 2010)

Appendix G - Core Strategy Policies Assessment (July 2010)

Appendix H Core Strategy (Publication Version) Policies Appraisal (September 2010)


i

Non Technical Summary Overview of Process and Purpose of Sustainability Appraisal Rossendale Borough Council (RBC) is preparing a Local Development Framework (LDF) for the Borough, comprising a number of Development Plan Documents (DPDs) that set out the policies and proposals for the development and use of land. As part of the LDF, the Core Strategy DPD sets out the vision, objectives and key policies for the future development of Rossendale.

This Sustainability Appraisal (SA) Report has been prepared to fulfil the requirements for SA arising from the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and the requirements for Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) arising from the SEA Directive. The purpose of SA is to promote sustainable development through better integration of sustainability (economic, social and environmental) considerations in the preparation and adoption of plans. The SEA Directive requires that certain plans and programmes undergo an environmental assessment, due to the likelihood that they will have significant environmental effects once implemented.

This SA Report accompanies the Core Strategy DPD (Publication Version) for consultation from 20th September to 1st November 2010.

The SA process that has been completed for RBC Core Strategy DPD to date can be summarised chronologically as follows:

• An initial LDF Scoping Report was prepared in 2005 (Entec) and consulted on with statutory consultees between August and September 2005;

• Following consultation with statutory consultees, the SA Scoping Report was finalised and used to assess the Core Strategy Issues and Options Document;

• An SA/SEA Report on the assessment of the Core Strategy Issues and Options Document was published for consultation in November 2005;

• Following consultation, a further SA/SEA Report was published to accompany the Preferred Options Core Strategy Document between April and May 2006;

• An updated SA/SEA Scoping Report for the Core Strategy was prepared in September 2009 (Scott Wilson), revising the work of Entec originally published in 2005. The updated SA/SEA Scoping Report examined the policy context in detail, set out baseline information and projected trends in the future baseline, identified sustainability issues and generated an updated SA Framework for assessment.

• An SA Report for ‘The Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy Document was published in November 2009 (Scott Wilson) in accordance with the revised Scoping Report (September 2009). The SA Report was published for consultation to accompany the Plan document between 16th November 2009 and 18th December 2009;

• Following consultation, RBC amended a number of policies from the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ document. These amended policies were subject to an interim SA process, undertaken by Atkins in 2010 and reported to accompany the ‘Bespoke Consultation’ that occurred between 14th May 2010 and 4th June 2010; and

• In July 2010, an appraisal of the full set of policies that form the Core Strategy was undertaken by Atkins, to complete the assessment, in addition to the bespoke consultation stage. This led to an internal review of the policies of the plan, leading to the Publication Version of the Core Strategy DPD.

This SA Report has been prepared to accompany the Core Strategy DPD Publication Version for consultation and examination. It builds upon the relevant information from the previous SA reports. This SA Report assesses the final policies in the Core Strategy DPD Publication Version and outlines their potential for enabling sustainable development in Rossendale.


ii

Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA)

An HRA is required where a plan or project under consideration is likely to have a significant effect on a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) or Special Protection Area (SPA). In such assessments, Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS9) states that consideration is also given to sites designated as Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar sites), potential SPAs and candidate SACs. Hereafter, these sites are collectively referred to as ‘international sites’.

There are no international sites within Rossendale. However, there are four international sites within 20 km of the Borough boundary. These include:

• Rochdale Canal SAC: Located approximately 3.1 km south-east of the Borough boundary; • South Pennine Moors SAC: Located approximately 3.1 km north-east of the Borough boundary; • South Pennine Moors Phase 2 SPA: Located approximately 3.1 km north-east of the Borough boundary;

and, • Peak District Moors (South Pennine Moors Phase 1) SPA: Located approximately 13 km south-east of

the Borough boundary; All of these international sites have been included in the HRA. In addition, Bowland Fells SPA has also been including in this assessment. This international site is located approximately 24.7 km north-west of the Borough boundary.

The results of the HRA have been considered in the preparation of this SA Report.

Contents and Main Objectives of the Core Strategy The Rossendale Core Strategy DPD sets out the Council’s spatial vision and strategic objectives that will manage and guide development in the Borough over the next twenty years and beyond. The Core Strategy objectives are as follows:

Core Strategy: Spatial Vision

Rossendale is defined by its Pennine moorland countryside and small stone built towns and villages located along the valley floors and will continue to be so. By 2026, we aim to reduce inequalities across the Borough by strengthening opportunities in the East of Rossendale and fulfilling the potential of the West of the Borough. Rawtenstall and its surrounding communities will be the central focus of the Borough. The Valley Centre will be redeveloped and will act as a regeneration catalyst for the rest of the town centre; incorporating additional and increased choice of shopping, retail and office facilities, well linked to a new bus interchange and Rawtenstall train station. Rossendale’s distinctive landscapes and natural assets will continue to be protected and enhanced for both their intrinsic value to biodiversity and their recreational and economic value to local people and tourists alike. The east of Rossendale including Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Whitworth will continue to develop as tourist destinations for sport and recreational activities as well as an area of historical and architectural interest. Most development including housing and affordable housing will take place within the urban boundaries of the main settlements, capitalising on the move towards a low-carbon economy and supporting sustainable lifestyles. Particular emphasis will be placed on realising the objectives of the existing Housing Market Renewal programme and any subsequent initiatives in the east. Rawtenstall together with Haslingden, Bacup and Whitworth will remain priority areas for economic development including employment and office space.


iii

Core Strategy: Strategic Objectives

SO1. To maintain the extent of local transport provision and access to services throughout Rossendale; with particular emphasis on restoring and improving the condition of the network , and expanding links to and from Greater Manchester and other areas; along with reducing perceptions of parochialism between Rawtenstall and Bacup and encouraging sustainable modes of transport.

SO2. Meet the housing needs of the current and future population(s) in relation to amount, types, size, location, quality and price and actively support initiatives and proposals in the east which would assist in achieving the objectives of the Elevate HMR pathfinder or future programme.

SO3. To create the opportunities for people to achieve their aspirations and maximise health and mental well-being, training, skills provision, and education, particularly in the east of the Borough where educational attainment and worklessness is an acute issue.

SO4. To promote high quality design, enhance and improve Rossendale’s built heritage and maximise its potential value as a catalyst for regeneration and further investment in the Borough, especially in Bacup town centre and designated conservation areas.

SO5. Encourage and support local businesses and inward investment, entrepreneurship and new sectors of the economy to grow, whilst ensuring that critical infrastructure including sites and buildings suitable for supporting employment and wealth generation are retained, with a focus on bringing redundant previously developed land back into sustainable uses.

SO6. Promote Rawtenstall as the main town centre for Rossendale with particular focus on regenerating the Valley Centre. Bacup, Haslingden and other local centres and parades should serve the needs of the local population/catchment emphasising the role of local businesses and local identities.

SO7. Identification, protection, enhancement and management of Rossendale’s natural environment and landscapes, maximising their potential to support sustainable tourism, recreation and leisure provision, whilst accommodating renewable energy in an appropriate and sensitive manner. Schemes and proposals supporting the Adrenaline Gateway project will be actively encouraged, especially where they will link into other forms of tourism and recreation attractions, particularly in the east around Lee Quarry.

S08. To mitigate and adapt to climate change in particular through ensuring that new development is delivered in sustainable locations; reducing the carbon footprint of new and existing building stock; protecting and enhancing the Borough’s Green Infrastructure and promoting sustainable transport.

The Core Strategy contains a set of 30 Policies, six of which relate to specific areas within the Borough, developed to implement the spatial vision and strategic objectives, as follows:

Area Visions and Policies • AVP1 – Strategy for Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth; • AVP2 – Strategy for Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir; • AVP3 – Strategy for Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water; • AVP4 – Strategy for Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough; • AVP5 – Strategy for South West Rossendale; • AVP6 – Strategy for Haslingden and Rising Bridge;

Policies • 1 – General Development Locations and Principles; • 2 – Meeting Rossendale’s Housing Requirement; • 3 – Distribution of Affordable Housing; • 4 – Affordable and Supported Housing;


iv

• 5 – Meeting the Needs of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople; • 6 – Training and Skills; • 7 – Social Infrastructure; • 8 – Transport Proposals including Rawtenstall-Manchester Railway Link; • 9 – Accessibility; • 10 – Provision for Employment; • 11 – Retail and Other Town Centre Uses; • 12 – The Valley Centre, Rawtenstall; • 13 – Protecting Key Local Retail and Other Services; • 14 – Tourism; • 15 – Overnight Tourist Accommodation; • 16 – Preserving and Enhancing Rossendale’s Built Environment; • 17 – Rossendale’s Green Infrastructure; • 18 –Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Landscape Conservation; • Climate Change and Renewable Energy; • 20 – Wind Energy; • 21 – Supporting the Rural Economy and its Communities; • 22 – Planning Contributions; • 23 – Promoting High Quality Design and Spaces; • 24 – Planning Application Requirements.

Sustainability Baseline and Key Issues Scoping work was undertaken in 2005 to identify sustainability baseline and key issues and updated in 2009. The update aimed to ensure that the SA covered the key sustainability issues of relevance to Rossendale within the context of the Core Strategy. The key sustainability issues can be summarised as:

• Potential effect on international sites • Threat from development and climate change on local biodiversity • Threat from development on local geodiversity • Large areas of contaminated land • Poor water quality • Low implementation of renewable energy generative capacity • Flood risk • High level of local distinctiveness • Need for protection of designated Green Belt • High levels of deprivation and poor accessibility to health services • Ageing population • Increase in education deprivation • High levels of unemployment and a mis-match of local skills with employment opportunities • High retail vacancy levels • Low comparative revenue from tourism • Poor accessibility by public transport • Undersupply of housing, poor quality and growing affordability issue


v

Sustainability Appraisal Framework From the analysis of key sustainability issues, a framework of sustainability objectives, indicators and targets was developed. The purpose of the SA Framework is to provide a set of criteria against which the performance of the Core Strategy can be predicted and evaluated. The sustainability objectives for Rossendale are:

1. To protect, enhance and manage places, landscapes and buildings of historic, cultural and archaeological value

2. To protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity in Rossendale

3. To protect and improve the quality of Rossendale’s waterways and to sustainably manage water resources

4. To promote adaptation to Rossendale’s changing climate

5. To reduce flood risk in Rossendale from rivers

6. To minimise the requirement for energy use, promote efficient energy use and increase the use of energy from renewable resources

7. To protect and improve land quality in Rossendale

8. To protect and improve air quality and minimise noise and light pollution in Rossendale

9. To ensure the efficient use of natural resources and sustainable management of waste, minimise its production and increase re-use, recycling and recovery rates

10. To improve access to a range of good quality, affordable and resource efficient housing that meets the needs of the community of Rossendale

11. To improve access to basic goods, services and amenities and equality of opportunity in Rossendale

12. To improve physical and mental health and well-being of people and reduce health inequalities in Rossendale

13. To improve education, skills and qualifications in the Borough and provide opportunities for lifelong learning

14. To support a strong, diverse, vibrant and sustainable local economy to foster balanced economic growth

15. Support the development of the sustainable leisure, cultural and tourism industry

16. To maintain and enhance the vitality and viability of town and village centres in the Borough

17. To improve the choice and use of sustainable transport in Rossendale and reduce the need to travel

Using the baseline data, predictions of future trends were developed, to provide a baseline position that permits comparative analysis of the situation in Rossendale without the implementation of the LDF against the predicted effects of implementing the Core Strategy. Predictions were developed against each of the sustainability objectives to allow detailed analysis.

Compatibility between Core Strategy and SA Objectives A compatibility assessment was undertaken as part of the preparation of the SA Report for ‘The Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy consultation document to identify to what extent the Objectives of the Core Strategy are compatible with the SA objectives.


vi

Core Strategy Strategic Options An assessment of the strategic options of the Core Strategy was conducted as part of the preparation of the SA Report for ‘The Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy consultation document.

Assessment of the Core Strategy Preferred Policies

The first iteration of the preferred policies assessment was undertaken to accompany ‘The Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy consultation document by the consultants Scott Wilson. The findings of this assessment are presented in section 8 and Appendix D. This appraisal was superseded by the appraisal of the updated policies in the Core Strategy in May (Bespoke Consultation) and July 2010 (Appendices F and G) undertaken by consultants Atkins. The assessments reported in this SA Report use a revised methodology and SA Framework. This report documents the fifth and final iteration of the SA for which a detailed assessment of the revised policies in the Publication Version of the Core Strategy DPD has been undertaken.

The Core Strategy (Publication Version) sets out thirty policies, six of which are Area Vision Policies, the remainder being topic-based policies. Table 8.2 shows the predicted effects of the Core Strategy (Publication Version). This enables an overview of the predicted effects of the Core Strategy as a whole, in terms of how it may lead to sustainable development.

The Core Policies offer potentially significant positive effects against the majority of social and economic objectives and many of the environmental objectives, therefore suitably addressing the issues associated with: protecting, enhancing and managing all aspects of the historic environment; biodiversity and geodiversity; quality of water resources and their sustainable management; adaptation to climate change; reducing flood risk; improving land quality; sustainable waste management; affordable and quality housing provision; access to key services and facilities; health and well-being; education and skills; economic growth; tourism and leisure; vitality and viability; and sustainable transport choices, However, a range of both significant positive and negative effects have also been identified with regard to minimising the requirement for energy, promoting efficient energy use and increasing the use of energy from renewable resources; and protecting and improving air quality and minimising noise and light pollution in Rossendale. The predicted negative effects are generally associated with policies that seek to introduce new development, including renewable energy technologies, into areas of the Borough that are substantially undeveloped at present.

Mitigation Although the Core Strategy will have a positive significant effect in sustainability terms overall, certain policies have the potential for negative significant effects relating primarily to the impact of physical development on the environment.

Mitigation measures have been identified during the evaluation process. They seek to reduce the scale/importance of significant negative effects and, where possible, enhance positive effects.

Monitoring Recommendations for the monitoring of significant sustainability effects of the implementation of the Core Strategy DPD have been set out in this SA Report.

The Council must prepare an Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) setting out, amongst other things, the extent to which the policies set out in the DPDs and SPDs are being achieved. The significant effect indicators (for monitoring important effects identified by the SA) identified through the SA process should ideally be monitored as part of the AMR process, which monitors the performance of the plan. In the case of the monitoring suggestions made, it is important to note that these are initial recommendations. It will be for the Council to consider the practicalities of monitoring and what might be achievable.


vii

Conclusions The Core Policies within the RBC Core Strategy DPD meet, to a large extent, the range of sustainability objectives identified in the SA framework, on the whole achieving a balance of positive significant effects.

Recommendations have been made previously on earlier iterations of the policies through the SA and HRA processes. Many of these recommendations have been taken forward and are reflected in the Publication Version of the Core Strategy Policies, to ensure that they deliver sustainable development.

The majority of the predicted effects for the Publication Version of the Core Strategy are significantly positive. Significant positive effects, with no significantly negative effects, are predicted against the following SA objectives:

• 1: To protect, enhance and manage places, landscapes and buildings of historic, cultural and archaeological value;

• 2: To protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity in Rossendale; • 3: To protect and improve the quality of Rossendale’s waterways and to sustainably manage water

resources; • 4: To promote adaptation to Rossendale’s changing climate; • 5: To reduce flood risk in Rossendale from rivers; • 7: To protect and improve land quality in Rossendale; • 9: To ensure that the efficient use of natural resources and sustainable management of waste, minimise

its production and increase re-use, recycling and recovery rates; • 10: To improve access to a range of good quality, affordable and resource efficient housing that meets

the needs of the community of Rossendale; • 11: To improve access to basic goods, services and amenities and equality of opportunity in Rossendale; • 12: To improve physical and mental health and well-being of people and reduce health inequalities in

Rossendale; • 13: To improve education, skills and qualifications in the Borough and provide opportunities for lifelong

learning; • 14: To support a strong, diverse, vibrant and sustainable local economy to foster balanced economic

growth; • 15: Support the development of the sustainable leisure, cultural and tourism industry; • 16: To maintain and enhance the vitality and viability of town and village centres in the Borough; and • 17: To improve the choice and use of sustainable transport in Rossendale and reduce the need to travel. A mix of both significant positive and negative effects is predicted for two of the SA objectives:

• 6: To minimise the requirement for energy use, promote efficient energy use and increase the use of energy from renewable resources; and

• 8: To protect and improve air quality and minimise noise and light pollution in Rossendale. It should be noted that although some negative effects are predicted for the above SA objectives, the significant positive effects are much greater in number. Therefore an overall positive effect with regards to the performance of the Core Strategy against the SA objectives is predicted. In addition, the HRA concludes that: “it is considered that the Publication Version of the Core Strategy and its policies will not (alone or in combination) lead to likely significant effects on the qualifying features of the five international sites that have been considered.”


1

1. Introduction Local Development Framework

1.1 Local Development Frameworks (LDFs) are to be prepared by Local Planning Authorities (LPAs). LDFs comprise a portfolio of Local Development Documents (LDDs). LDDs may be divided into three categories:

• Development Plan Documents (DPDs) - subject to independent examination and have the weight of development plan status.

• Supplementary Planning Documents (SPDs) - not subject to independent examination and do not have development plan status. SPDs build upon policy and the guidance specified in DPDs. SPDs cannot be used to allocate land.

• Statement of Community Involvement (SCI) - outlines how the LPA will consult with key stakeholders and the community. The SCI is subject to independent examination.

1.2 Rossendale Borough Council’s (RBC’s) LDF is the overall name for the collection of new planning documents that will be written. It consists of the Local Development Scheme (LDS), Statement of Community Involvement, DPDs and SPDs and the Annual Monitoring Report. Like the Local Plan that it will replace, the LDF will provide a policy framework for decisions about the future use and development of land and will help to shape the local environment.

1.3 The Rossendale LDF is a collection of LDDs, including:

• Core Strategy DPD;

• Site Allocations DPD;

• Development Management Policies DPD; and

• SPDs – Planning Obligations; Design; Open Space and Play Equipment; Alterations and Extensions to Residential Properties.

Rossendale Core Strategy DPD 1.4 The most important DPD to be produced by the Council is the Core Strategy DPD, which will

provide the overarching spatial planning framework for Rossendale for the period to 2026.

1.5 The production of the Core Strategy DPD has been undertaken in stages. The Core Strategy DPD (Publication Version) builds on earlier consultation documents (including Issues and Options (2005); Preferred Option (2006); Addendum report (2006); Area Visions (2009); Proposed Way Forward (2009); and Bespoke Consultation (May 2010)) and the feedback received from these consultations, as well as referencing new evidence, making it more relevant and up to date. The Core Strategy DPD (Publication Version) presents a set of policies and a strategic approach to future development and growth in Rossendale.

1.6 The Core Strategy (Publication Version) document contains several key components, including:

• A Spatial Vision and Strategic Objectives: The vision sets out the aspirations for the development of the Borough by 2026 and overarching Objectives for policy development to achieve this.

• Six Area Visions and Policies: The area visions outline the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats of each area, and then propose a way forward to address the key issues.


2

• Topic Planning Policies: These “core” policy options describe preferred policy approaches for fifteen different policy topics, ranging from housing to climate change. Alternative options considered are also set out.

• Monitoring and Implementation: Each policy option is followed by a table, which sets out potential indicators and targets, delivery agencies, implementation, monitoring and review considerations.

1.7 Supporting Documentation: The Core Strategy (Publication Version) is supported by a wide range of evidence, including a Habitats Regulation Assessment Stage 1 Screening Report, Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA), Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA), Employment Land Study, Retail and Town Centre Study, Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA), Affordable Housing Viability Assessment (AHVA) and an Open Space and Play Equipment Audit. This Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward Sustainability Appraisal Report is among the most important of the supporting documents.

Geographical Area and Main Characteristics 1.8 The Rossendale Borough Council (RBC) administrative area is in the North West of England,

situated in the county of Lancashire. Rossendale is one of the smallest Lancashire boroughs, covering an area of 138 sq kilometres and is located in the south-east of the county. Rossendale forms part of a grouping of authorities known as “Pennine Lancashire”, also encompassing the neighbouring authorities of Burnley and Hyndburn as well as Pendle, Ribble Valley and Blackburn with Darwen. The Borough is situated just north of Greater Manchester and only 18 miles from Manchester city centre. Rossendale is bounded to the south by the metropolitan authorities of Bury (to the south-west) and Rochdale (to the south-east). Calderdale (to the east) forms part of the West Yorkshire conurbation.

1.9 The Borough has a population of 65,000 and occupies a strategic location within the region, astride the M66/A56(T), linking the M60/M62 with the M65 motorway. This popular commuter route and the proximity to Manchester make Rossendale highly accessible. Whilst the influence of Manchester as a centre for employment, shopping, leisure and other services is felt throughout the Borough, there are also strong links with adjoining authorities, notably Bury, Burnley and Rochdale.

1.10 The Borough is defined by a series of interlocking valleys dissecting open moorland, which has determined the pattern of development of the district. A series of closely linked small towns line the valley floors, the largest being Rawtenstall, Haslingden and Bacup. The Borough’s uplands have been extensively quarried and continue to be so. Many of the buildings in the Borough are built from the local sandstone, giving the towns and villages in the area a distinctive identity. A number of the disused quarries have been re-used for leisure purposes, for example, Lee Quarry near Bacup has become a major destination for mountain bikers.

1.11 The proximity to Manchester and the unique topography of the Borough are attributed to its rapid development during the industrial revolution, as water from the Borough’s many rivers and tributaries, and coal largely brought in by rail, were used to power mills supporting the textile, shoe and slipper industries. More recently, this accessibility has resulted in significant numbers of new commuter homes being built in the west of the Borough in the last 25 years, particularly in areas such as Helmshore, Edenfield and Crawshawbooth.

1.12 Like many other areas in the north, the industrial revolution has left a legacy of derelict and contaminated land and buildings (in particular mills). Some parts of the Borough (particularly in the east) also experience poor health, pockets of high unemployment and low education attainment figures. There have been improvements in recent years but the current recession has slowed progress. A tangible split between the west and east of the Borough has developed, related to the better road connections and attractiveness of the environment in the West, as


3

opposed to the perceived poor interconnectivity between Bacup & Rawtenstall and a perception of isolation in the east.

1.13 In addition to poor access, the east is also the location for Rossendale’s Housing Market Renewal (HMR) Pathfinder, which covers Bacup, Stacksteads and Britannia. The HMR aims to deal with the issue of low house prices and demand in the area. There is a concentration of areas in the east of the Borough that are within the top 10% of the most deprived areas in the country. Much attention is needed to make this area a successful and attractive place for people to live, work and visit.

1.14 Rossendale contains some priority habitats listed on the UK Biodiversity Action Plan (UKBAP) with the predominant habitats in the Borough being Upland Heath and Blanket Bog, with Wet Woodland in the south west. The Borough has three Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs):

• Lower Red Lees Pasture in the south west of the Borough is in an unfavourable declining condition due to lack of appropriate grazing reducing species diversity.

• Hodge Clough is in a favourable condition though the condition of the woodland may deteriorate unless there is more intervention.

• Lee Quarry is managed for recreation and the features of the site are still visible, though more interpretation of its geological features would be beneficial.

1.15 Healey Dell, on the far south east border with Rochdale, is the Borough’s only Local Nature Reserve (LNR) extending over an area of 25 hectares (ha.). There are seven Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) sites in the Borough. Not surprisingly, the agricultural land classification is poor; with sites classified at 4 and 5 (i.e. the poorest grades).

1.16 For the purpose of the Core Strategy, Rossendale can be divided into six character areas, as shown on Figure 1.1.


4

Figure 1.1 - Rossendale Character Areas

Crown Copyright: 100018418

Requirement for Sustainability Appraisal

1.17 Under Section 39(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, a Sustainability Appraisal (SA) is mandatory for new or revised Development Plan Documents (DPDs). SA screening is required for new Supplementary Planning Document (SPDs) and in some cases a full SA should be undertaken. Alongside this requirement for SA of components of the Local Development Framework (LDF), the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 sets a statutory requirement for local authorities to carry out a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) of all planning and land use documents. The 2004 regulations transpose the requirements of the SEA EU Directive.

1.18 The UK Government’s preferred approach is to combine the SEA and SA requirements into one unified process that considers economic and social, as well as environmental effects. The UK Government1 has published guidance on undertaking SA of LDFs that incorporates the requirements of the SEA Directive entitled ‘Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents’ (‘the SA Guidance’)2

. The combined SA / SEA process is referred to as SA in this report.

1.19 The Guidance advocates a five-stage approach to undertaking SA (Figure 1.2).

1 Office of the Deputy Prime Minister – now the Department for Communities and Local Government 2 Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents, ODPM, November 2005.


5

Figure 1.2 - Five-stage approach to SA

Stage E • Monitor the implementation of the plan (including

its sustainability effects)

Stage A • Assemble the evidence base to inform the

appraisal • Establish the framework for undertaking the

appraisal (in the form of sustainability objectives)

Stage B • Appraise the plan objectives, options and

preferred options/policies against the framework taking into account the evidence base.

• Propose mitigation measures for alleviating the plan’s adverse effects as well as indicators for monitoring the plan’s sustainability

Stage C • Prepare a sustainability appraisal report

documenting the appraisal process and findings

Stage D • Consult stakeholders on the plan and SA report

Scoping report

Sustainability appraisal report

LDF annual monitoring report

(AMR)

1.20 Stage A in the SA process develops the framework for undertaking future appraisals – generally this is a set of sustainability Objectives – as well as collating an evidence base to inform the appraisal. The framework and evidence base are presented in a ‘Scoping Report’ for consultation with stakeholders including the statutory consultees (English Heritage, the Environment Agency and Natural England).

1.21 An early Scoping Report was prepared for RBC in 2005 and used as the basis for appraisal of the Issues and Options and Preferred Options stages of the Core Strategy (this work was undertaken on behalf of RBC by Entec). A new and updated Scoping Report was prepared in 2009 (on behalf of RBC by Scott Wilson) and this has been used as the framework for appraisal of the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ version of the Core Strategy.

1.22 Stage B in the SA process is the appraisal itself. This requires the identification and evaluation of the impacts of the different options open to the plan-makers, as well as those of the preferred options / draft plan policies. Mitigation measures for alleviating adverse impacts are also


6

proposed at this stage, together with potential indicators for monitoring those impacts during the implementation of the Plan.

1.23 Stage C in the SA process involves documenting the appraisal and preparing the SA Report (this incorporates the material required for inclusion in the Environmental Report under the SEA Directive). Following statutory consultation (Stage D) the SA Report has been updated to reflect changes made in response to representations. Stage E concerns ongoing monitoring of significant effects.

1.24 A SA Report was published in 2005 incorporating the assessment of the Core Strategy Issues and Options and this was consulted upon alongside the Core Strategy document. A further SA report was produced to assess the Preferred Options (2006) in the same way. Both of these reports used the SA Framework developed in the first SA Scoping Report, published in 2005. The SA Report, which accompanied the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward document, was the third iteration of the Stage C SA Report (produced by Scott Wilson and consulted upon in November 2009).

1.25 Between the14th May and the 4th June 2010, RBC undertook a separate public consultation exercise on the policies listed below with an accompanying SA Note (Bespoke Consultation Sustainability Appraisal Note). The assessment examined an iteration of some of the Core Strategy policies, amended in response to the consultation on the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward and its accompanying SA Report (prepared by Scott Wilson in November 2009). The amended policies that were assessed and consulted upon comprised:

• RLDF 1: General Development Locations and Principals (Policy significantly changed);

• RLDF 2: Meeting Rossendale’s Housing Requirements (RLDF 18);

• RLDF 3: Distribution of Additional Housing (Policy significantly changed);

• RLDF 4: Affordable and Supported Housing (Policy significantly changed);

• RLDF 16: Preserving and Enhancing Rossendale’s Built Environment (Policy significantly changed);

• RLDF 17: Rossendale’s Green Infrastructure (new Policy);

• RLDF 18: Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Landscape Conservation (Policy significantly changed – former RLDF 17);

• RLDF 19: Climate Change and Renewable Energy (Except Wind) (Policy significantly changed); and

• RLDF 23: Planning Application Considerations (Policy significantly changed).

1.26 The detailed assessment tables and the responses from the council to the SA recommendations, including how these have influenced the development of the policies, are included in Appendix F.

1.27 Following the bespoke consultation, the remaining policies of the Core Strategy were assessed in July 2010. This iteration of the SA was not subject to consultation. The results from this stage of assessment, along with the Council’s responses to the recommendations of the SA, are included in Appendix G.

1.28 This SA Report is to accompany the Publication Version of the Core Strategy and is the outcome of the fifth iteration of the SA process. This assessment iteration takes into account all of the previous iterations of the SA to date.


7

1.29 Sustainability Appraisal represents a decision aiding process that assists in the development of the plan or programme under development. Government guidance on local spatial planning states that3:

“The Sustainability Appraisal should perform a key role in providing a sound evidence base for the plan and form an integrated part of the plan preparation process. Sustainability Assessment should inform the evaluation of alternatives. Sustainability Assessment should provide a powerful means of proving to decision makers, and the public, that the plan is the most appropriate given reasonable alternatives”

1.30 The SA should seek to be an integrated, effective and purposeful tool for the production of LDDs for the Rossendale LDF. Figure 1.3 illustrates how the SA is an integral part of the Plan preparation process and should be undertaken in parallel with it.

3 Communities and Local Government (2008), Planning Policy Statement 12: creating strong safe and prosperous communities through Local Spatial Planning, London:TSO


8

Figure 1.3 - SA Process – How it fits into the process of preparing a DPD

Develop the options in consultation with stakeholders and

select the preferred option

Finalise the preferred options and prepare

Publication Draft

e.g. SHLAA, SHMA, SFRA etc

Develop the evidence base and SEA framework to inform the assessment of the DPD. Produce a Scoping Report

and consult on this.

Appraise the options and preferred option. Use the SA

to help to appraise, refine and generate options

Prepare and consult on the SA report

Stage A

Stage C

Stage D

Sustainability Appraisal

DPD Production

Develop the evidence base

Synthesise the evidence base and identify the key issues

Develop a spatial vision for the area and

strategic Objectives

Appraise the strategic Objectives Stage B

Subject options to SA as they emerge on an iterative basis

Invite representations, finalise DPD, submit

for examination

Appraise any significant changes to the Publication Draft. Prepare revised SA

report and submit alongside the DPD

Examination, binding report and adoption

Prepare sustainability statement as part of adoption statement

Monitor DPD implementation including

sustainability effects

Stage E


9

Summary of SA to Date 1.31 The SA process that has been completed for RBC to date can be summarised chronologically as

follows:

• An initial LDF Scoping Report was prepared in 2005 (Entec) and consulted on with statutory consultees between August and September 2005;

• Following consultation with statutory consultees, the SA Scoping Report was finalised and used to assess the Core Strategy Issues and Options Document;

• An SA/SEA Report on the assessment of the Core Strategy Issues and Options Document was published for consultation in November 2005;

• Following consultation, a further SA/SEA Report was published to accompany the Preferred Options Core Strategy Document between April and Map 2006;

• An updated SA/SEA Scoping Report for the Core Strategy was prepared in September 2009 (Scott Wilson), revising the work of Entec originally published in 2005. The updated SA/SEA Scoping Report examined the policy context in detail, set out baseline information and projected trends in the future baseline, identified sustainability issues and generated an updated SA Framework.

• An SA Report for ‘The Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy Document was published in November 2009 (Scott Wilson) in accordance with the revised Scoping Report (September 2009). The SA Report was placed on consultation to accompany the Plan document between 16th November 2009 and 18th December 2009;

• Following consultation, RBC amended a number of policies from the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ document. These amended policies were subject to an interim SA process, undertaken by Atkins in 2010 and reported to accompany the ‘Bespoke Consultation’ that occurred between 14th May 2010 and 4th June 2010; and

• In July 2010, an appraisal of the full set of policies that form the Core Strategy Document was undertaken, to complete the assessment in addition to the bespoke consultation stage. This led to an internal review of the policies of the plan, leading to the Publication Version of the Core Strategy DPD.

1.32 This SA Report has been prepared to accompany the Core Strategy DPD Publication Version for consultation. It builds upon the relevant information from the previous SA reports. This SA Report assesses the final policies in the Core Strategy DPD Publication Version and outlines their potential for enabling sustainable development in Rossendale.

Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) 1.33 In the UK, the European Habitats Directive (Directive 92/42/EEC) has been transposed into

national legislation in the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (the Habitat Regulations). Regulation 21 implements the requirements of Article 6.3 of the Directive for Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) of a project or plan. Such an assessment is required where a plan or project under consideration is likely to have a significant effect on a Special Area of Conservation (SAC) or Special Protection Area (SPA). In such assessments, Planning Policy Statement 9: Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (PPS9) states that consideration is also given to sites designated as Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar sites), potential SPAs and candidate SACs. Hereafter, these sites are collectively referred to as ‘international sites’.

1.34 There are no international sites within Rossendale. However, there are four international sites within 20 km of the Borough boundary. These include:


10

• Rochdale Canal SAC: Located approximately 3.1 km south-east of the Borough boundary;

• South Pennine Moors SAC: Located approximately 3.1 km north-east of the Borough boundary;

• South Pennine Moors Phase 2 SPA: Located approximately 3.1 km north-east of the Borough boundary; and,

• Peak District Moors (South Pennine Moors Phase 1) SPA: Located approximately 13 km south-east of the Borough boundary;

1.35 All of these international sites have been included in the HRA. In addition, Bowland Fells SPA has also been including in this assessment. This international site is located approximately 24.7 km north-west of the Borough boundary.

1.36 The results of the HRA have been considered in the preparation of this SA Report.

Consultation 1.37 The SEA Directive requires that the public and the statutory consultation bodies (English

Heritage, the Environment Agency and Natural England) are consulted at Stage D1 on the plan and report.

1.38 This report is published alongside the Core Strategy Publication Document for consultation, from 20th September to 1st November 2010. The Core Strategy Publication Document and the SA Report (including the Non-technical Summary), along with other Core Strategy supporting documents, are available to view online on the Council’s website http://www.rossendale.gov.uk/corestrategy and also in various deposit locations around the Borough including Council’s One Stop Shop on Lord Street in Rawtenstall between 9am and 5pm Monday to Friday, or at the following libraries: Rawtenstall, Bacup, Whitworth, Crawshawbooth, Haslingden.

1.39 Comments on both the Publication document and this report are welcomed. Comments can be sent to:

By Post: Core Strategy Forward Planning One Stop Shop Lord Street Rawtenstall Rossendale BB4 7LZ

By Internet: http://www.rossendale.gov.uk/consultation By Email:

[email protected]

Further Information 1.40 If you would like to discuss any matters relating to the Core Strategy consultation process,

including this Sustainability Appraisal Report, please call the Forward Planning Team on 01706 252417

1.41 An electronic version of this document is available from the Council's website at: http://www.rossendale.gov.uk/corestrategy


11

2. Methodology 2.1 The approach used in the SA of the Rossendale Core Strategy is based on the process set out in

the SA Guidance meeting the requirements of the SEA Regulations.

2.2 The methodology adopted involved the completion of SA Stages A, B, C and D and associated tasks as outlined in Figure 1.2.

2.3 The sections below describe the methodology used for Stages A, B, C and D tasks, the results of which are documented in this report.

2.4 The topic-by-topic approach utilised by the previous SA (Scott Wilson) is retained to present the findings of the scoping stage, compatibility assessment and assessment of the strategic options. The relationship between the sustainability topics used by Scott Wilson and the SA objectives that form the SA Framework for assessment purposes is shown in Table C.1 in Appendix C.

Stage A: Setting the Context and Objectives, Establishing the Baseline and Deciding on Scope

2.5 Scoping work was undertaken in 2005 and updated in 2009. The update aimed to ensure that the SA covered the key sustainability issues of relevance to Rossendale within the context of the Core Strategy.

2.6 Selective updates of the scoping work have also been undertaken by Atkins as part of the preparation of this SA Report.

Other Relevant Plans and Programmes 2.7 Guidance requires that both the Core Strategy and the SA Scoping Report should be set in the

context of national, regional and local objectives along with strategic planning, transport, social, economic and environmental policies. This being the case, a comprehensive review of all relevant plans, policies and programmes (PPPs) was carried out as part of the SA Scoping process (Stage A). This ensures that the objectives in the SA Report generally adhere to, and are not in conflict with, objectives found in other PPPs and also assists in the setting of sustainability objectives for the SA. In addition to this, the PPP review can also be used to ascertain potential conflicts between objectives that may need to be addressed as part of the overall SA and Plan production process.

2.8 A detailed review of international, national, regional and local documents was undertaken, the results of which are presented in Appendix 1 (Context Review) of the SA Scoping Report (Scott Wilson, September 2009) (presented in Appendix A of this report). An update of the key documents (e.g. government acts, policy statements) has been undertaken as part of the preparation of this SA Report. Section 3 includes the main findings of the context review in relation to each sustainability topic, drawing from the SA Scoping Report prepared in September 2009.

Baseline Data and Sustainability Issues 2.9 To predict accurately how the Core Strategy proposals will affect the environment, and social and

economic factors, it is first important to understand the current state of these factors and then examine their likely evolution without the implementation of the Plan.


12

2.10 Section 3 presents the baseline data and details the key sustainability issues identified in the 2009 Scoping Report that are relevant to the assessment (e.g. those components likely to be affected by the Plan).

2.11 Section 3 also builds upon the ‘likely future evolution of the baseline’ presented in the 2009 Scoping Report and essentially reports on the ‘business as usual scenario’, as required in the ODPM SA Guidance. This means that the evolution of the baseline has also considered the effects of the existing planning policies (and any other relevant Council policies) in determining how the future situation will be affected.

Sustainability Appraisal Framework 2.12 A framework of objectives and sub criteria, against which the proposals in the Core Strategy can

be assessed, was drawn up under the three sustainable development dimensions: social, economic and environmental. The Framework was developed using an iterative process, based on the review of relevant PPPs and the analysis of the baseline data and key sustainability issues. The first SA Framework was set out in the SA Scoping Report 2005, which was then revised in the updated 2009 Scoping Report. The Framework was further refined in the Bespoke Consultation Sustainability Appraisal Note, May 2010, to ensure that all relevant sustainability aspects were covered either by the Objectives or sub criteria. This is presented in Appendix E.

2.13 The SA Framework used for the assessment of the Core Strategy Publication document was subject to minor refinements relating to the indicators. These changes were made to reflect the most recent consultation comments and the final Framework used for the assessment contained in this report is presented in Section 4.

Consulting on the Scope of the Sustainability Appraisal 2.14 Both SA Scoping Reports (2005 and 2009) were published for a 5 week period of consultation

with English Heritage, English Nature and the Environment Agency and other key stakeholders. Following the consultation period, amendments were made to the Scoping Reports in accordance with comments received. The final Scoping Report was published in September 2009.

Stage B: Developing and Defining Options Compatibility Assessment of Core Strategy Objectives against SA objectives

2.15 A compatibility assessment was undertaken as part of the preparation of the SA Report for ‘The Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy consultation document to identify to what extent the Objectives of the Core Strategy are compatible with the SA objectives. The compatibility matrix is presented in Section 5.

Assessment of Strategic Options and Preferred Option

2.16 The SEA Directive and best practice guidance for SA stress the importance of assessing alternative options as part of the process of defining a preferred option. An assessment of the strategic options of the Core Strategy was conducted as part of the preparation of the SA Report for ‘The Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy consultation document.

2.17 Guidance states that the consideration of alternatives must focus on genuine and realistic alternatives. At the stage of the production of the Core Strategy, the options considered should


13

represent alternative means of achieving the overall Core Strategy Objectives and each should be capable of being translated into proposed policies.

Assessment of Strategic Options 2.18 Within the Core Strategy Preferred Options document, for each policy area, the preferred option

was selected out of two or more options. The options not taken forward are referred to as “alternatives”. Therefore, the SA Report for the Core Strategy ‘Proposed Way Forward’ documented the SA of the policy alternatives.

2.19 The assessment used a broad-brush and qualitative approach, which is generally accepted as good practice by the SA guidance for the earlier strategic stages of the appraisal. The assessment matrices for the strategic options followed the format shown below, using the colour coding (also shown below) to demonstrate the overall assessment score. This approach was designed to demonstrate how the strategic options perform in relation to each other and also in relation to the relevant preferred option.

2.20 It should be noted that since the options appraisal was published for consultation at the same time as the SA Report for the Preferred Options Core Strategy document, the opportunity to include the more detailed scores derived from the preferred options assessment (informed by the options assessment) was taken – the methodology that was used to generate this preferred options assessment score is described in the sub-section below.

SA Objective Summary of preferred option (i.e. preferred

policies in combination)

Alternative 1 Alternative 2

To protect, enhance and manage biodiversity

Results of interactions of policies X, Y and Z (derived from the preferred options

assessment). Briefly summarise the

impact the preferred policy has on the topic, as

assessed in the topic chapter

Likely effects of spatial option considered:

Compare how the impact on this topic would change if the

alternative were implemented instead of the

preferred option

Likely effects of spatial option considered.

Compare how the impact on this topic would change if the

alternative were implemented instead of the

preferred option

Summary: Summarise the overall comparison between the preferred policy option and the alternatives and any justification for selecting the preferred policy if an alternative has actually been assessed as more sustainable than the preferred option.

2.21 The following key was used to demonstrate within the matrix the individual effect of a preferred option or alternative on a topic to provide an easy to understand comparison of the effects.

Very Positive Positive No Effect Negative Very Negative

2.22 Section 7 of this SA Report includes the discussion of the alternative spatial options and options for each policy area in relation to each sustainability topic. The full assessment tables are included as Appendix 4 of the SA Report of the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy document – on the basis that they have already been included in a public consultation exercise and their role in developing the Core Strategy through to preferred options has been fulfilled, they are not reproduced in this second iteration of the SA Report.

Assessment of Preferred Options 2.23 A basic matrix was used to present the assessment of policy options and comment on the

preferred options in relation to the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy document. The matrix


14

assessed the preferred policies against the SA Framework Objectives, aiming to highlight the constituent SA objectives against which the policies offered the potential to deliver change. In this context, ‘change’ was measured against the baseline and the scoring approach sought to quantify the scale of any predicted effect in terms of likely significance – this approach relied upon the following key:

2.24 Consequently, the matrix was used to ‘screen out’ those elements of the policies that were predicted to have little or no effect on a given SA topic/ Objective. This allowed the assessment to focus on those aspects of policies with a significant effect and, to a lesser degree, make recommendations that also incorporated comments on the policies with a less significant effect.

2.25 The assessment was narrative in nature, and looked at policies in combination, rather than in isolation. This includes long/medium/short term effects and whether the policies have any specific effects on particular locations within the Plan area.

2.26 A separate matrix for each preferred policy area was prepared, the results of which are included in Appendix D (Tables D.1 to D.28).

Assessment of Core Strategy Policies (2010) 2.27 The first iteration of the preferred policies assessment was undertaken to accompany ‘The

Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy consultation document by the consultants Scott Wilson. The findings of this assessment are presented in section 8 and Appendix D. This appraisal was superseded by the appraisal of the updated policies in the Core Strategy in May (Bespoke Consultation) and July 2010 (Appendices F and G) undertaken by consultants Atkins. The May and July assessments, in common with the assessments reported in this SAR, use a revised methodology and SA Framework.

2.28 This report documents the fifth and final iteration of the SA for which a detailed assessment of the Publication Version of the Core Strategy DPD has been undertaken. For the purposes of the assessment, the policy content has been grouped into themes based on similar aims and objectives, with each set of policies being termed as ‘components’. Each of the constituent components has been assessed using a separate assessment sheet that explores the predicted impacts of the component against each of the SA Objectives from the SA Framework. The results of the components assessments have then been brought together in a single sheet summarising the assessment across all policies.

2.29 The assessment has been undertaken as a ’Whole Plan’ Assessment. This means that although the policies were appraised individually or in groups (as components), the combined effect of all of the preferred policies together has been recognised in assigning a score for the predicted sustainability performance against each SA Objective. This approach is considered to be more holistic and it reflects the reality of the policies of the Plan being adopted and implemented together.

2.30 The detailed assessment comprised a systematic two-stage process, described below.

Prediction of Effects 2.31 Using the baseline data and supporting information, the effects of the policies within each of the

components have been predicted for each of the SA Objectives. A six point scale was used to

KEY

Significant Effect

Less Significant Effect

Little or no Effect


15

characterise the magnitude of predicted effects in terms of the change to the current baseline. Effects were also characterised in terms of their geographical extent, their duration (short, medium or long term), whether they are likely to be temporary or permanent, and the degree of certainty with which the prediction was made. Predictions were made using the evidence of the baseline data wherever possible. Short term, medium and long term effects were defined in relation to the Plan period (to 2027) as follows:

• Short term: within 5 years;

• Medium term: between 5 and 10 years;

• Long term: beyond 10 years.

2.32 Table 2.1 details the scoring scales used to characterise the various features of the predicted effects.

2.33 The definitions of ‘permanence’ in terms of the assessment seek to capture the evolving effects of the Plan during the Plan period. Therefore, ‘permanent’ is defined as an effect that will extend beyond the plan period of 2027 although effects may not be ‘permanent’ in the strict definition of the word.

Table 2.1 - Sustainability Effects Scoring

Magnitude Scale Duration Permanence Certainty

Major Positive Local

Within or in Proximity to Rossendale Borough

ST-MT

Short term- medium term

Temp Temporary Low

Minor Positive

Sub-Reg North West ST-

LT Short term –long term Perm Permanent Med

- No Effect Reg/ Nat

Northern England and Beyond

MT-LT

Medium term – long term

High

? Unclear Effects ST Short term

Minor Negative MT Medium

term

Major negative LT Long term

2.34 Magnitude of effects was defined in terms of progress towards achieving the relevant SA Objective:

• Major Positive - likely to result in substantial progress towards the Objective;

• Minor Positive - likely to result in limited progress towards the Objective;

• Major Negative - likely to be substantially detrimental to achieving the Objective; and

• Minor Negative - likely to be to the limited detriment of achieving the Objective.

Assessment of the Significance of Effects 2.35 The effects predicted for each SA Objective for each component (encompassing a combination of

policies and preferred strategic sites) were assessed for significance using a simple, systematic process. An assessment score was derived for each SA Objective based on the scores for each effect characteristic (magnitude, duration, scale, permanence and certainty) for short, medium and long term effects, using the assessment scale shown in Table 2.2.


16

Table 2.2 - Sustainability Assessment Scoring

+++ Strongly positive

++ Moderately positive

+ Slightly positive

0 No effect

- Slightly negative

-- Moderately negative

--- Strongly negative

+/- Combination of positive and negative effects / neutral effect

n/a Not assessed

2.36 For the purposes of analysing the results of the assessment, significant effects are those that

result in strongly or moderately negative or positive effects.

Secondary and Cumulative Effects Assessments 2.37 Annex I of the SEA Directive requires that the assessment of effects include secondary,

cumulative and synergistic effects.

2.38 Secondary or indirect effects are effects that are not a direct result of the Plan, but occur away from the original effect or as a result of the complex pathway e.g. a development that changes a water table and thus affects the ecology of a nearby wetland. These effects are not cumulative and have been identified and assessed primarily through the examination of the relationship between various Objectives during the Assessment of Environmental Effects.

2.39 Cumulative effects arise where several proposals individually may or may not have a significant effect, but in-combination have a significant effect due, for example, to spatial crowding or temporal overlap between plans, proposals and actions and repeated removal or addition of resources due to proposals and actions. Cumulative effects can be:

• Additive – the simple sum of all the effects;

• Neutralising – where effects counteract each other to reduce the overall effect;

• Synergistic – is the result of two or more effects acting together, producing a greater impact than the simple sum of the effects when acting alone. For instance, a wildlife habitat can become progressively fragmented with limited effects on a particular species until the last fragmentation makes the areas too small to support the species at all.

2.40 Many environmental problems result from cumulative effects. These effects are very hard to deal with on a project by project basis through Environmental Impact Assessment. It is at the SA level that they are most effectively identified and addressed.

2.41 Cumulative effects assessment is a systematic procedure for identifying and evaluating the significance of effects from multiple activities. The analysis of the causes, pathways and consequences of these effects is an essential part of the process.

2.42 Cumulative (including additive, neutralising and synergistic) effects have been considered throughout the entire SA process, as described below:


17

• As part of the review of relevant strategies, PPPs and the derivation of draft SA Objectives, key receptors have been identified that may be subject to cumulative effects.

• In the process of collecting baseline information, cumulative effects have been considered by identifying key receptors (e.g. specific wildlife habitats) and information on how these have changed with time, as well as how they are likely to change without the implementation of the Local Development Framework. Targets have been identified (where possible), that indicate how close to capacity the key receptor is, which is a key determining factor in assessing the likelihood of cumulative and synergistic effects occurring, as well as their degree of significance.

• Through the analysis of environmental issues and problems, receptors have been identified that are particularly sensitive, in decline or near to their threshold (where such information is available).

• The development of SA Objectives, indicators and targets has been influenced by cumulative effects identified through the process above.

• The likely cumulative effects of the strategic alternatives have been identified, highlighting potential cumulative effects that should be considered later in the SA process.

• Testing the consistency between the Core Strategy and SA Objectives has highlighted the potential for cumulative effects against specific Core Strategy Objectives.

• Cumulative effects of the policies have been predicted and assessed through the identification of key receptors and SA Objectives that consider cumulative effects assessment.

Mitigation 2.43 Mitigation measures have been identified during the evaluation process to reduce the

scale/importance of significant negative effects and, where possible, enhance positive effects.

Monitoring 2.44 SA monitoring involves measuring indicators which will enable a better understanding of the

causal links between the implementation of the plan and the likely significant effects (positive or negative) being monitored. It thus helps to ensure that any adverse effects that arise during implementation, whether or not they were foreseen, can be identified and that action can be taken to address them.

Stage C: Preparing the Sustainability Appraisal Report

2.45 The SA Report was prepared to accompany the Core Strategy ‘Proposed Way Forward’ on consultation from the 16th of November to the 18th of December 2009.

Stage D: Consulting on the Draft Plan and Sustainability Appraisal Report Appraising significant changes

2.46 The SA Report has now been revised to appraise the amended policies following the Core Strategy ‘Proposed Way Forward’ consultation, the Bespoke consultation and the internal SA in


18

July 2010. This SA Report accompanies the Core Strategy DPD (Publication Version) for consultation from 20th September to 1st November 2010.

Meeting the requirements of the SEA Directive 2.47 As mentioned in Section 1 there is a fundamental difference between the SA and SEA

methodologies. SEA is primarily focused on environmental effects and the methodology addresses a number of topic areas namely Biodiversity, Population, Human Health, Flora and Flora, Soil, Water, Air, Climatic Factors, Material Assets, Cultural Heritage and Landscape and the interrelationship between these topics. SA, however, widens the scope of the appraisal to assess the effects of a Plan to include social and economic considerations, as well as environmental topics.

2.48 This SA has been undertaken to meet the requirements of the SEA Directive for environmental assessment of plans. Table 2.3 sets out where the specific SEA requirements have been met in this SA Report.

Table 2.3 - Schedule of SEA Requirements

Requirements of the Directive Where Covered in Report

Preparation of an environmental report in which the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the plan or programme, and reasonable alternatives taking into account the Objectives and geographical scope of the plan or programme, are identified, described and evaluated. The information to be given is:

a) An outline of the contents, main Objectives of the plan or programme and relationship with other relevant plans and programmes

Section 1, Section 3

b) The relevant aspects of the current state of the environment and the likely evolution without implementation of the plan or programme


c) The environmental characteristics of areas likely to be significantly affected

Section 3

d) Any existing environmental problems which are relevant to the plan or programme including, in particular, those relating to any areas of a particular environmental importance, such as areas designated pursuant to Directive 79/409/EEC and 92/43/EEC


e) The environmental protection Objectives established at international, community or national level which are relevant to the programme and the way those Objectives and any environmental considerations have been taken into account during its preparation

Section 3

f) The likely significant effects on the environment, including: short, medium and long term; permanent and temporary; positive and negative; secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects on issues such as: biodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors.

Sections 7, 8 and 9 Appendix D, F, G

and H

g) The measures envisaged to prevent, reduce and, as fully as possible, offset any significant adverse effects on the environment of implementing the plan or programme.

Sections 7, 8, 9 and 10 Appendix D, F,

G and H

h) An outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with Section 7,


19

Requirements of the Directive Where Covered in Report

and a description of how the assessment was undertaken including any difficulties (such as technical deficiencies or lack of know-how) encountered in compiling the required information

Appendix D

i) A description of measures envisaged concerning monitoring (in accordance with regulation 17)

Section 12

j) A non-technical summary of the information provided under the above headings

Non-Technical Summary


20

3. Setting the Policy Context and Establishing the Baseline Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna Introduction

3.1 Biodiversity is the variety of life on earth at all levels, from genes to worldwide populations of the same species; from communities of species sharing the same small area of habitat to worldwide ecosystems.

3.2 The main threats to both local and global biodiversity are associated with human activities causing: habitat loss/damage, loss of biodiversity, loss of protected species, disturbance to and pollution of ecosystems, risk to unprotected habitats and the impact of climate change. Many species-populations are being reduced and fragmented below viable levels. Conserving biodiversity is a global, long-term challenge and requires global, long-term solutions that start at the local level. The neglect of habitats can also have a detrimental impact on their ecological value.

3.3 Biodiversity can be protected and maintained through the designation of areas, such as Special Protection Areas (EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds4), Special Areas of Conservation (EC Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora5), Sites of Specific Scientific Interest (SSSI), Ramsar sites and Local Nature Reserves (LNR). However, many landscape features serve as important habitat for biodiversity and do not have any designation for nature (for example, parks, canals and ancient woodland).

What is the policy context? 3.4 There is a range of policy available in relation to the biodiversity, flora and fauna topic at the

national, regional, sub-regional and local level. The key policy documents relevant to the topic are set out below.

National Policy Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006

3.5 The natural environment and rural communities act identifies legislation in relation to the protection of the natural environment in Britain. More specifically, it identifies legislation in relation to nature conservation, wildlife, sites of special scientific interest, National Parks and Broads, rights of way and inland waterways. From 1 October 2006, all local authorities and other public authorities in England and Wales have a Duty to have regard to the conservation of biodiversity in exercising their functions. The Duty aims to raise the profile and visibility of biodiversity, to clarify existing commitments with regard to biodiversity and to make it a natural and integral part of policy and decision making. The Duty is set out in Section 40 of the Natural Environment and Communities Act (NERC) 20066 and states that:

4 The EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds is available from: http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1373 5 The EC Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora is available from: http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1374 6 The Natural Environment and Communities Act 2006: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060016_en_4#pt3-pb1-l1g40 Guidance on Guidance for Local Authorities on Implementing the Biodiversity Duty is available from: http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/biodiversity/documents/la-guid-english.pdf


21

“Every public authority must, in exercising its functions, have regard, so far as is consistent with the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving biodiversity.”

The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010

3.6 The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 consolidate all the various amendments made to the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c.) Regulations 1994 in respect of England and Wales. The 1994 Regulations transposed Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora (EC Habitats Directive) into national law. The Regulations came into force on 30 October 1994.7

3.7 The Regulations provide for the designation and protection of 'European sites', the protection of 'European protected species', and the adaptation of planning and other controls for the protection of European Sites.

3.8 The provisions of the Directive require Member States to introduce a range of measures including8:

• “Maintain or restore European protected habitats and species listed in the Annexes at a favourable conservation status as defined in Articles 1 and 2;

• Contribute to a coherent European ecological network of protected sites by designating Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) for habitats listed on Annex I and for species listed on Annex II. These measures are also to be applied to Special Protection Areas (SPAs) classified under Article 4 of the Birds Directive. Together SACs and SPAs make up the Natura 2000 network (Article 3);

• Ensure conservation measures are in place to appropriately manage SACs and ensure appropriate assessment of plans and projects likely to have a significant effect on the integrity an SAC. Projects may still be permitted if there are no alternatives, and there are imperative reasons of overriding public interest. In such cases compensatory measures are necessary to ensure the overall coherence of the Natura 2000 network (Article 6);

• Member States shall also endeavour to encourage the management of features of the landscape that support the Natura 2000 network (Articles 3 and10);

• Undertake surveillance of habitats and species (Article 11);

• Ensure strict protection of species listed on Annex IV (Article 12 for animals and Article 13 for plants); and

• Report on the implementation of the Directive every six years (Article 17).”

Planning Policy Statement 9 (PPS 9): Biodiversity and Geological Conservation (2005) and Consultation paper on a new Planning Policy Statement: Planning for a Natural and Healthy Environment, CLG, (March 2010)

3.9 PPS 9 states the importance of biodiversity conservation and enhancement to the promotion of sustainable development. It prioritises the need to avoid, mitigate and compensate for harm to biodiversity and incorporate ways to restore and enhance it. The PPS sets out the Government’s Objectives in relation to the conservation of biodiversity and geology.

3.10 The new consultation PPS seeks to consolidate PPS9 and take a holistic approach to the natural environment. The new PPS consultation document will supersede PPS9 as well as other PPS upon adoption. A key Objective of this single new PPS is to ensure that the planning system delivers healthy sustainable communities which adapt to and are resilient to climate change and

7 http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1379 8 http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-1374


22

gives the appropriate level of protection to the natural environment. This includes the introduction of a strategy for Green Infrastructure.

3.11 To achieve this overarching aim, it is the Government’s policy that planning should:

• “Conserve and enhance the natural environment, including the quality, character and value of the landscape, biodiversity, geodiversity and soil within rural and urban areas by ensuring that:

- The natural environment is integrated into the strategic vision of communities;

- Policies and decisions are based on an understanding of the nature, extent and value of the natural environment and recognise its importance; and

- Construction, development and regeneration has minimal impacts on biodiversity and should enhance it wherever possible to contribute to the overall aim of no net loss to biodiversity.

• Minimise vulnerability of places, people and wildlife to the impacts of climate change and contribute to effective climate change adaptation measures by maintaining, creating and improving networks of green infrastructure within both urban and rural areas

• Deliver safe and attractive places to live, which respect the character of the area, promote health and wellbeing, and reduce social inequalities by ensuring that people have access to high quality open spaces, green infrastructure and sports, recreational and play spaces and facilities which are safely and easily accessible by walking, cycling or public transport

• Provide access and appropriate recreational opportunities in rural and coastal areas to enable urban and rural dwellers to enjoy the wider countryside.”

Regional Policy Action for Sustainability – Regional Sustainable Development Framework

3.12 Action for Sustainability (AFS) is the North West's Regional Sustainable Development Framework and is used to inform sustainability appraisals of regional plans and strategies. It is an important tool in determining sustainable Objectives of regional policy development and assessing the likely impact of policies against those Objectives. Some of the relevant Objectives in relation to biodiversity, flora and fauna identified in the framework include:

• Conservation of the natural environment;

• Improve and protect local environmental quality;

• Protect and enhance the biodiversity, the local character and accessibility of the landscape; and

• Protect and enhance endangered species, habitats and sites of geological importance.

Lancashire County Council Biodiversity Action Plan (2008)

3.13 The Lancashire Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) is made up of many individual species and habitat plans. Each plan gives information on the status and threats to the species or habitat. The most important section of the plan details the conservation action required and the organisations responsible.


23

Local Policy Rossendale Borough Council Draft Biodiversity Action Plan 2009-2010

3.14 The main purpose of the Rossendale Borough Council Biodiversity Action Plan is to provide the necessary information on which to base actions in the future that will implement the biodiversity policy statement. Some of the key actions within the plan include: carry out research into the location of habitats in and around Rossendale; investigate possibilities for creating new habitats, plants or wildlife; and ensure protection of sites through local and regional policies and strategies.

What is the situation now? 3.15 Rossendale has a variety of sites that provide a range of habitat for flora and fauna. The

emerging Core Strategy Policies will be required to continue to protect and enhance the existing habitats and species that have been identified in Rossendale and promote the extension and creation of existing and new habitats.

Biodiversity Designations 3.16 Although there are no Natura 2000 sites located within the Rossendale Borough, there are four

that lie outside the Borough boundary that could be affected by the policies in Rossendale’s Core Strategy. These include Rochdale Canal Special Area of Conservation (SAC), South Pennine SAC, Peak District Moors Special Protection Area (SPA) and South Pennine Moors Phase 2 SPA.

3.17 Healey Dell is the only Local Nature Reserve (LNR) located in the Rossendale Borough and amounts to 25 hectares. There are three designated SSSIs within the Rossendale Borough (with their condition shown in brackets): Lower Red Lees Pasture (unfavourable declining); Hodge Clough (favourable); and Lee Quarry (favourable).


24

Figure 3.1 shows the location of the LNR and SSSIs. Furthermore, within Rossendale there are eight woodlands with a total of 19 hectares of Ancient Semi-natural Woodland9.

9 Information taken from Lancashire County Council – Broadleaved and Mixed Woodland habitat action plan


25

Figure 3.1 - Healey Dell Local Nature Reserve and Sites of Specific Scientific Importance in the Rossendale Borough

Habitats 3.18 Information in relation to the priority habitats in Rossendale is listed in the UK Biodiversity Action

Plan. Within the Rossendale Borough, the predominant habitat type is Upland Heath and Blanket Bog. There are also areas located towards the south of the district designated as Wet Woodland. Consultation responses to the SA Report have also indicated that the waterways of the Borough are also regarded as priority habitat.

Land Resources Introduction

3.19 The use of land resources is a key component of sustainable development. The needs of urban development, agriculture, the protection of valued flora and fauna and the provision of open space must all be balanced with the protection of geodiversity. Geodiversity is the variety of rocks, fossils, minerals, landforms and soils, along with the natural processes that shape the landscape.

3.20 Rossendale is comprised of a range of different features relating to the theme of land resources. This includes: a varied geology; a number of Regionally Important Geological / Geomorphological Sites (RIGS); and contaminated land within the built up areas of the Borough.

3.21 The land resources topic also covers the production of waste and its disposal. According to the waste hierarchy, the most sustainable way to deal with rubbish is to avoid producing it in the first place (waste prevention/ minimisation) and then as much as possible should be re-used. In order to preserve land resources, it is important that the extent to which rubbish comes to rest in landfill sites is minimised.


26

What is the policy context? 3.22 There is a range of policy available in relation to the land resources topic at the national, regional,

sub-regional and local level. The key policy documents relevant to the topic are set out below.

National Policy Waste Strategy for England (2007)

3.23 The Waste Strategy for England promotes best practicable environmental option (BPEO), the waste hierarchy and the proximity principle. Within the strategy, a number of key Objectives are set. These include the need to: decouple waste growth from economic growth and put more emphasis upon waste prevention and re-use; secure the investment in infrastructure needed to divert waste from landfill and for the management of hazardous waste; and get the most environmental benefit from investment through increased recycling of resources and recovery of energy from residual waste using a mix of technologies.

Minerals Policy Statement 1: Planning and Minerals (November 2006)

3.24 The minerals policy statement seeks to ensure that the need for minerals by society and the economy is managed in an integrated way against its impact on the environment and communities. Some of the key Objectives of the minerals policy statement include: to safeguard mineral resources as far as possible; to prevent or minimise production of mineral waste; and to protect internationally and nationally designated areas of landscape value and nature conservation importance from minerals development, other than in the exceptional circumstances;

PPS 10: Planning for Sustainable Waste Management (2006)

3.25 PPS 10 promotes driving waste management up the waste hierarchy. Some of the key Objectives within the PPS include: to provide sufficient and timely provision of waste management facilities that meet the needs of their communities; to ensure waste is disposed of as near as possible to the place of production; and to protect the Green Belt, but, recognise that some types of waste management facilities have wider environmental and economic benefits of waste management are a material consideration;

Sub-Regional Policy A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire – Landscape Character Assessment (2000)

3.26 This document provides a landscape assessment of Lancashire. The strategy identifies four Objectives, of which two are relevant to the land resources theme:

• To classify the landscape into distinct landscape types identifying key characteristics and sensitivities and providing principles to guide landscape change;

• To describe the current appearance of the landscape, classifying it into distinct zones of homogeneous character, summarising the key features of each landscape character area.

A Geodiversity Action Plan for Lancashire (November 2004)

3.27 The plan sets out a vision and a model by which geo-conservation in Lancashire may be pursued collectively, by those bodies and individuals with an interest or obligation in respect of such matters.

3.28 The overall aim of the plan is to protect the geological and landscape heritage of Lancashire for the foreseeable future, with a system similar to that which is already in place for the protection of biological heritage sites through biological action plans.


27

Lancashire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Strategy (February 2009)

3.29 The adopted Core Strategy sets out strategic policies for sustainable resource management in the plan area. The Objectives for Lancashire come under the following headings:

• Safeguarding Lancashire’s mineral resources;

• Minimising the need for minerals extraction;

• Meeting the demand for new minerals;

• Identifying sites and areas for minerals extraction;

• Achieving sustainable minerals production;

• Community involvement and partnership working;

• Promoting waste minimisation and increasing waste awareness;

• Managing our waste as a resource;

• Identifying capacity for managing our waste; and

• Achieving sustainable waste management,

What is the situation now? 3.30 A range of information in relation to land resources in the Rossendale Borough was identified

within the SA scoping report. A brief overview of this is provided below.

Geology 3.31 Rossendale has a varied and interesting geology. Approximately 60% of the Borough is covered

in drift deposits comprising both glacial and recent deposits. Drift deposits are generally on upland areas. The Borough also contains large areas that are made up of boulder clay/glacial till. The eastern side of the Borough is covered in drift deposits comprised of a large area of sandstone and there are a few large peat deposits present on high ground throughout the Borough10.

3.32 There are seven RIGS (the most important places for geology and geomorphology outside statutorily protected land) located within Rossendale.

10 Information in this section is derived from the Rossendale Borough Council Contaminated Land Inspection Study (2002)


28

Figure 3.2 below shows the location of the RIGS within Rossendale.


29

Figure 3.2 - Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological sites in Lancashire

Source: A geodiversity action plan for Lancashire – Lancashire RIGS group 2004)

Aquifers 3.33 Minor aquifers are areas that will hold water but only in relatively small amounts. Figure 3.3

below shows the location of minor aquifers throughout the Rossendale Borough. The areas towards the centre of the Borough area predominantly identified as being permeable with high leaching.


30

Figure 3.3 - Groundwater Vulnerability – Minor Aquifers in Rossendale (Source: Rossendale Borough Council – Level 1 SFRA)

Contaminated and Previously Developed Land

3.34 Rossendale Borough Council has a long history of industrial development with many different industries having been present within the Borough over the years. Large areas of contaminated land are located within the Facit and Shawforth ward and in Stacksteads. There are also pockets of contaminated land within Whitwell, Longholme, Hareholme, Cribden, Goodshaw, Worsley, Helmshore and Greenfield11.

3.35 In total, Rossendale has 97 hectares of brownfield land. This is the highest amongst the other East Lancashire authorities of Burnley, Hyndburn and Pendle. Each of the Rossendale wards has a proportion of vacant and derelict land and the wards of Worsley and Hareholme have the largest proportions in the Borough12.

Household Waste and Recycling 3.36 The production of waste and its disposal has implications for the environmental performance of

Rossendale’s local development documents. The rate of recycling and composting has increased in the Borough between 2005/06 and 2007/08. Furthermore, out of the twelve waste collection authorities in Lancashire, Rossendale performs fairly well and has the fourth lowest waste collection per head in the period towards the end of 2008. Since the October to December 2006 quarter, the amount of waste collected per head has reduced from 91.11 kg per head to 89.16 kg per head (a decrease of 1.95 kg)13.

11 Information in relation to contaminated land is available from the Rossendale Borough Council Contaminated Land Inspection Study (2002) 12 Information in relation to Brownfield land is available from Lancashire County Council 13 Information is taken from the Waste Data Flow website http://www.wastedataflow.org/home.aspx


31

Water Quality and Resources Introduction

3.37 Water is an essential resource in supporting biodiversity, recreation and economic opportunities. Effective planning and management of the water resources is essential now and in the future if sustainable development is to be ensured.

What is the policy context? 3.38 There is a range of policy available in relation to the water quality and resources topic at the


National Policy Water Framework Directive (2003)

3.39 The European Water Framework Directive (2000) became part of UK law in 2003. This legislation requires that all surface water bodies meet “good” ecological status and “good” chemical status by 2015.

The Water Act (2003)

3.40 Water conservation is a priority within The Act and water abstraction/impoundment must not be done so in an unsustainable manner or one that contributes to the deterioration of water resources. The sustainable use of water and water conservation are key Objectives.

Future Water – The Government’s Water Strategy for England (February 2008)

3.41 Within this document, climate change is discussed as being likely to lead to water shortages in the summer months in the future. The vision for water policy and management, by 2030 at the latest, is to have:

• Improved the quality of our water environment and the ecology which it supports, and continued to provide high levels of drinking water quality from our taps;

• Sustainably managed risks from flooding and coastal erosion, with greater understanding and more effective management of surface water;

• Ensured a sustainable use of water resources, and implemented fair, affordable and cost reflective water charges;

• Cut greenhouse gas emissions; and

• Embedded continuous adaptation to climate change and other pressures across the water industry and water users.

Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control (2004)

3.42 PPS 23 states that pollution impacts are a material planning consideration. The LDF should set out the criteria against which applications for potentially polluting developments will be considered. The ‘precautionary principle’ should be invoked when there is pollution potential.


32

Regional Policy Water for Life and Livelihoods: River Basin Management Plan North West River Basin District (December 2009)

3.43 Prepared under the Water Framework Directive, the river basin management plan focuses on the protection, improvement and sustainable use of the water environment. The plan focuses on achieving the Objectives of the WFD which are:

• Prevent deterioration in the status of aquatic ecosystems, protect them and improve the ecological condition of waters;

• Aim to achieve at least good status for all water bodies by 2015. Where this is not possible and subject to the criteria set out in the Directive, aim to achieve good status by 2021 or 2027;

• Meet the requirements of Water Framework Directive Protected Areas;

• Promote sustainable use of water as a natural resource;

• Conserve habitats and species that depend directly on water;

• Progressively reduce or phase out the release of individual pollutants or groups of pollutants that present a significant threat to the aquatic environment;

• Progressively reduce the pollution of groundwater and prevent or limit the entry of pollutants;

• Contribute to mitigating the effects of floods and droughts

What is the situation now? 3.44 Rossendale is characterised by enclosed uplands, upland moorland, hills, reservoir valleys and

wooded lower valleys, with densely populated urban centres in the lower valley extents. The catchment of the River Irwell drains the majority of the Borough and a small area of the Borough towards the North West, north of Haslingden, falls within the catchment of the River Ribble.

3.45 Rivers are an important part of the Borough’s environment as they support amphibians, fish and many plant species as well as a variety of invertebrates. Rivers can also form important links between otherwise fragmented habitats acting as wildlife corridors.

3.46 Figure 3.4 below shows the location of watercourses within Rossendale. These are as follows:

• South West Rossendale – River Irwell

• Rawtenstall, Goodshaw, Loveclough and Crawshawbooth – River Irwell

• Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water – River Irwell, Clough Bottom Reservoir and Whitewell Brook

• Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir – River Irwell

• Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth – River Spodden, Cowm Reservoir, Spring Mill Reservoir and Brownhouse Wham Reservoir

Water quality 3.47 During the industrial revolution large sections of the River Irwell were canalised or culverted as it

wove behind factories and industrial areas. The prolonged industrial usage took its toll on the river and caused severe pollution.


33

3.48 In recent years, the rivers of Rossendale have improved greatly. Water quality has improved and the rivers can now support brown trout and diverse aquatic invertebrates. Protected white-clawed crayfish have been present in a pond in the Irwell Valley for 30 years. Water Voles have also been sighted in the upper Irwell tributaries.

3.49 Although the quality of river waters in the North West has improved in recent years, the region does still contain about one third of the poorest quality rivers in England. In Rossendale there is a total length of 45.3 km of waterways. The percentage of waterways in good, fair, poor or bad condition in Lancashire’s boroughs is measured by the Environment Agency Chemistry General Quality Assessment (GQA). In 2006, 79.8% of waterways were classed as being in good condition in Rossendale and 20.2% were classed as being in fair condition. In comparison with 2005, Rossendale has recorded a significant improvement in its ‘good quality’ classification (in 2005, the percentage of good quality waterways was 54.2%).

3.50 Additionally, the Water Framework Directive draft classification results (2008) shows that the ecological status of rivers in Rossendale is moderate, the quantitative status of groundwaters in Rossendale is good and the chemical status of groundwaters is poor.

Figure 3.4 - Rossendale Watercourses (Source: Rossendale Borough Council)

Nitrates

3.51 Nitrate Pollution Prevention Regulations 2008 require areas of land that drain into polluted waters and that contribute to the pollution of those waters to be designated as Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZ). The Borough contains a small amount of land that has been classified as Nitrate Vulnerable Zones (NVZ). This land is around the Rising Bridge and Loveclough areas. No new areas of the Borough were classified in 2002 as new nitrate vulnerable zones, which could be attributed to more sustainable agricultural practices. NVZ are classified as such when the waters exceed or are at risk of exceeding the EU limit of 50mg/NO3/l.


34

Air Quality Introduction

3.52 When air pollution is present in high concentrations it can cause various health effects ranging from irritation of the eyes, nose and throat, to the worsening of lung and heart diseases. In addition to impacts on human health, annual levels of nitrogen dioxide (mainly from traffic) and sulphur dioxide (mainly from industry) can negatively affect vegetation and ecosystems. Air pollutants can also lead to the soiling and corrosion of buildings.

What is the policy context? National Policy The Air Quality Strategy for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (July 2007)

3.53 The Air Quality Strategy sets out air quality Objectives and policy options to further improve air quality in the UK from today into the long term. As well as direct benefits to public health, these options are intended to provide important benefits to quality of life and help to protect our environment. The Strategy outlines a range of local measures such as:

• Corporate commitment to putting air quality at the heart of the decision making process, particularly in planning decisions or including air quality in local development frameworks;

• Commitment to working closely with relevant authorities responsible for highways and/ or environmental regulation on possible emissions reduction measures where trunk roads and/or industrial sources are major local sources of pollutants;

• Local traffic management measures to limit access to, or re-route traffic away from, problem areas. Low emission zones are a possible solution that some authorities have been looking at in this context; and

• Commitment to developing or promoting green travel plans.

Air Pollution: Action in a Changing Climate, England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland (March 2010)

3.54 The strategy document sets out the need to align policy on climate change with that for improving air quality: “Factoring air quality into decisions about how to reach climate change targets results in policy solutions with even greater benefits to society… These air quality/climate change co-benefits will be realised through actions such as promoting ultra low-carbon vehicles, renewable sources of electricity which do not involve combustion, energy efficiency measures, and reducing agricultural demand for nitrogen.”

Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development (2005)

3.55 Planning Policy Statement 1 (PPS 1) sets out how planning should contribute to sustainable patterns of urban and rural development. In relation to the air quality topic, PPS 1 states that development plan policies should take account of environmental issues such as air quality and pollution.

Planning Policy Statement 23: Planning and Pollution Control (2004) 3.56 Planning Policy Statement 23 advises that any consideration of the quality of air and leading to

impacts on health is capable of being a material planning consideration, in so far as it arises or may arise from or may affect any land use.


35

Local Policy Rossendale Air Quality Policy and Strategy draft 2008 – 2010

3.57 The overarching aim of the Air Quality Strategy is to “minimise the effects of air pollution on the quality of life in Rossendale”. The intention of this policy is to ensure the protection of people from existing air pollution sources, ensure Council compliance with the relevant legislation and to take action to reduce the production of pollution with a view to improving overall air quality in the long term. According to the May 2010 Air Quality Progress Report, this strategy is due for review later this year.

What is the situation now? 3.58 There are no significant issues in relation to air quality within the Rossendale Borough. Since

December 1997 each local authority in the UK has been carrying out a review and assessment of air quality in their area. This involves measuring air pollution and trying to predict how it will change in the next few years. In 2003, 2006 and 2009 Rossendale Borough Council undertook an Update and Screening Assessment (USA) as part of the process of continually assessing local air quality. The aim of the review is to make sure that the national air quality Objectives will be achieved throughout the UK by the relevant deadlines. If a local authority finds any areas where the Objectives are not likely to be achieved, it must declare an Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) there. There are currently no AQMAs in Rossendale, although as part of the review process it is understood that the designation of an AQMA at the Sykeside Roundabout near Tesco to the south of Haslingden is under consideration.

3.59 RBC currently monitors concentrations of Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) in the air at 19 sites around the Borough. NO2 is primarily produced by vehicle exhaust emissions and concentrations are therefore generally worst in places prone to heavy traffic flow or where traffic gathers and moves slowly, allowing exhaust emissions to build up in the air.

3.60 There is no automatic monitoring of PM10, sulphur dioxide, benzene or other pollutants carried out in Rossendale.


36

Table 3.1 – Air Quality Objectives included in Regulations for the purpose of Local Air Quality Management in England.

Table 3.2 – Results of Nitrogen Dioxide Diffusion Tubes


37

3.61 The 2010 progress report states that:

“Rossendale Borough Council have decided to cease monitoring at sites 4 (Burnley Road, Bacup),9 (Bacup Road, Waterfoot),11(Cuba Industrial site, Stubbins),12 (Burnley Road East, Reeds Holme) and 14 (Ashoka car park, Market Street, Whitworth) as trends and concentrations of NOx have been consistently low and well under the 40 µg/m3 limit for the last few years.

Some of the tubes at Haslingden Road End (numbers 5,6,7 and 10) and Bacup Road, Rawtenstall (numbers 1, 15 and 16) showed exceedances, although the sites in Haslingden are borderline, and a detailed assessment will be done in the summer when there are 12 months results available as monitoring only started in May 2009.”

3.62 Whilst pollution levels are generally low in Rossendale in relation to Metropolitan areas the highest levels of pollution are found near the bus station along Bacup Road, Rawtenstall and the roundabout near Tesco in Haslingden.

Effect of existing policies on current situation 3.63 The Rossendale Borough Council Local Plan saved policies (2007) does not include any policies

that identify the need to ensure that the air quality within the Borough is protected. However policy DC 1 (Development Criteria) requires all applications for planning permission to be considered on the basis of a number of criteria, including the likely level of air pollution that is likely to be created as a result of new development. This will help to ensure that new development will not have a significant detrimental impact on air quality within the Borough.


38

Climatic Factors and Flooding Introduction

3.64 Climate change is recognised as one of the most serious and important challenges facing the UK. Climate change issues are to be addressed at national, regional and local levels. In recent decades evidence has accumulated to demonstrate that an unprecedented rise in global temperatures has occurred over the last century or so. Scientific consensus attributes this change to emissions of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide from combustion of fossil fuels for energy generation or transport. The major contributing factor to increased greenhouse gases and climate change is human activity.

3.65 The impacts of a changing climate would include changes in the availability and quality of water resources, damage to native habitats and migration or extinction of native plants and animals. Infrastructure and buildings could be damaged more frequently by storms. It is likely that there will be significant impacts on the economy, particularly in the long term. Agriculture especially could be forced to adapt, with new crops replacing traditional varieties. Unfamiliar diseases might become commonplace in a warmer climate, and patterns of mortality could change with, for instance, fewer premature deaths in winter from cold but probably more deaths from higher temperatures in the summer.

3.66 In considering this topic, it is important to recognise that there is some overlap between this topic and others. In particular, the effect of air pollutants on climate change means that there is overlap with the Air Quality topic and the impact of climate change on flooding and flood risk means that there is overlap with the Water Quality and Resources topic.

What is the policy context? 3.67 There is a range of policy available in relation to the climatic factors and flooding topic at the


National Policy Consultation on a Planning Policy Statement: Planning for a Low Carbon Future in a Changing Climate (March 2010)

3.68 The new draft Planning Policy Statement brings together the PPS1 supplement (Climate Change) and PPS22 (Renewable energy- 2004) to become a consolidated supplement to PPS1 (Delivering Sustainable Development). This reflects changes in legislation including:

• The Climate Change Act 2008- legislation that makes the UK the first country in the world to adopt legally-binding carbon emission targets (statutory target of reducing carbon emissions by 80 per cent below 1990 levels by 2050, with an interim target of 34% by 2020);

• EU Directive 2009/28/EC on the promotion of the use of energy from renewable sources, where the UK has committed to sourcing 15% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020;

• The Low Carbon Transition Plan and the Renewable Energy Strategy were both published on 15 July 2009 and set out how the UK will achieve dramatic reductions in emissions and meet targets on renewables;

• The Household Energy Management Strategy was published on 2 March 2010;

• Publication of the proposed definition of zero carbon homes;


39

• Climate change projections were updated in 2009 by the UK Climate Impacts Programme;

• The Energy Act 2008 introduced powers for a Feed-In Tariff and the Renewable Heat Incentive aimed at driving an increase in renewable energy generating capacity;

• The Planning Act (2008) introduced a new planning regime for nationally significant infrastructure projects, including energy generation over 50 megawatts (MW).

3.69 Plan-making and development management should fully support the transition to a low carbon future in a changing climate. This means planning should:

• “Shape places so as to help secure radical cuts in greenhouse gas emissions. This requires the location and layout of new development to be planned to deliver the highest viable energy efficiency, including through the use of decentralised energy, reducing the need to travel, and the fullest possible use of sustainable transport.

• Actively support and help drive the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy.

• Shape places and secure new development so as to minimise vulnerability and provide resilience to impacts arising from climate change, and do so in ways consistent with cutting greenhouse gas emissions.

• Ensure local communities are given real opportunities to take positive action on climate change; in particular by encouraging community-led initiatives to reduce energy use and secure more renewable and low-carbon energy.”

Planning Policy Guidance 22: Renewable Energy, ODPM, (August 2004)

3.70 At the local level, planning authorities should set out the criteria that will be applied in assessing applications for planning permission for renewable energy projects. This PPG is in the process of being superseded by PPS: Planning for a low Carbon Future in a Changing Climate.

Planning and Climate Change: supplement to PPS 1 (December 2007)

3.71 Planning and Climate change sets out some of the key Objectives that local authorities are required to meet in order to combat climate change. All planning authorities are required to prepare and deliver spatial strategies that make a full contribution to delivering the Government’s Climate Change Programme and energy policies and secure new development and shape places resilient to the effects of climate change in ways consistent with social cohesion and inclusion.

Planning Policy Statement 25: Development and Flood Risk (March 2010)

3.72 The aim of PPS 25 is to ensure that flood risk is taken into account at all stages in the planning process to avoid inappropriate development in areas at risk of flooding, and direct development away from areas at highest risk. Where new development is, exceptionally, necessary in such areas, policy aims to make it safe without increasing flood risk elsewhere and where possible, reducing flood risk overall.

Regional Policy North West Sustainable Energy Strategy (2006)

3.73 The North West Sustainable Energy Strategy sets out how the region can contribute towards the development of renewable energy and greater take up of energy efficiency. The key relevant Objective is to set the region on a course to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 60% by 2050.


40

Sub-Regional Policy Lancashire Climate Change Strategy 2009-2020

3.74 The Lancashire Climate Change Strategy sets out the Partnership’s long-term vision that Lancashire is “low carbon and well adapted by 2020”. Lancashire is aiming to reduce its carbon dioxide emissions by at least 30% (relative to 1990). The strategy identifies the key Objectives for adapting to climate change and the key tools that will help to deliver strategic planning, raising awareness and education.

Local Policy River Irwell Catchment Flood Management Plan (2008)

3.75 The River Irwell Catchment Flood Management Plan includes the River Irwell and its tributaries to the north of Manchester. Some of the key aims are to reduce the risk of flooding and harm to people and the natural, historic and built environment caused by floods and to promote sustainable flood risk management.

What is the situation now? Climate Change14

3.76 Total CO2 emissions in Lancashire were estimated at 12.7 million tonnes, or 8.7 tonnes per person per year in 2005. This is 21% of the North West total and 2.4% of the UK total. The total emissions in Lancashire were less than in Greater Manchester and Merseyside but higher than Cumbria and Cheshire. In total, 45% of emissions in Lancashire are attributable to industrial, commercial and public sector sources, 29% to the domestic sector, 24% to road transport and 2% to land use, land use change and forestry. Total CO2 emissions for 2005 within Lancashire authorities were lowest in Rossendale (589 kilotonnes), with as much as 1,632 kilotonnes in Ribble Valley.

Energy Usage

3.77 The RSS for the North West highlights the need to improve energy conservation and efficiency in the region and to minimise energy consumption. In 2006, gas sales (both domestic and industrial commercial) and electricity sales (only for industrial commercial) were above the average for East Lancashire, the Lancashire County, the North West region and England. This demonstrates that gas and electricity consumption are above average within the Rossendale Borough15.

3.78 Data from 2006 is available that contains figures for calculating an energy rating using the government’s Standard Assessment Procedure. The information represents a measure of the overall efficiency of dwellings. Rossendale is placed towards the bottom of the English rankings (241/329) and the Lancashire rankings (9/13).

Renewable Energy

3.79 Only 0.006 MW of renewable energy was installed and completed in Rossendale in 2007/08. However, 65.316 MW of renewable energy generation (facilities) was granted permission within the Rossendale Borough. The regional target16 is that at least 10% of energy should be generated from renewable energy by 2010.

14 Information in relation to climate change in Rossendale is taken from the Lancashire Climate Change Strategy 2009-2010. 15 Gas and Electricity consumption figures are provided by Lancashire County Council as part of their environment statistics. 16 RSS for the North West – Environment, Minerals, Waste and Energy chapter.


41

Flood Risk

3.80 The effects of climate change are a concern for the Borough, in particular increased flood risk. The River Irwell that passes through the Borough increases the risk of flooding in certain areas. These areas are threatened by flooding relating to intense precipitation. The majority of land within the Borough is located within Flood Zone 1 (the least susceptible). However, 11.5% of existing developed land is located within either Flood Zone 3 or 2, which could potentially be an issue if a major flooding event occurs within the Borough. The areas that are potentially at risk of flooding are along narrow strips of land immediately adjacent to watercourses17.

3.81 The Rossendale Borough Council AMR 2007/08 provides information on the number of planning permissions granted contrary to Environment Agency advice on flooding and water quality grounds. In 2007/08, only one application was granted contrary to Environment Agency advice. This figure is lower than both 2006/07 (2 applications were granted contrary to Environment Agency advice) and 2004/05 (3 applications were granted contrary to Environment Agency advice).

17 Information in relation to flood risk in Rossendale is taken from the Rossendale Borough Council SFRA: Level 1


42

Figure 3.5 below shows the areas that are at risk of flooding within Rossendale. Urban locations within the study area that are potentially affected by flooding include parts of Bacup, Haslingden, Rawtenstall and Whitworth.


43

Figure 3.5 - Flood zones within Rossendale

Heritage and Landscape Introduction

3.82 Heritage can be considered to include the following aspects18:

• Monuments: architectural works, works of monumental sculpture and painting, elements or structures of an archaeological nature, inscriptions, cave dwellings and combinations of features, which are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science;

18 UNESCO (1972) CONVENTION CONCERNING THE PROTECTION OF THE WORLD CULTURAL AND NATURAL HERITAGE, Article 1 Available at: http://whc.unesco.org/en/conventiontext/ accessed on the 22nd December 2008


44

• Groups of buildings: groups of separate or connected buildings which, because of their architecture, their homogeneity or their place in the landscape, are of outstanding universal value from the point of view of history, art or science;

• Sites: works of man or the combined works of nature and man, and areas including archaeological sites, which are of outstanding universal value from the historical, aesthetic, ethnological or anthropological point of view.

3.83 Landscapes can be areas designated for their natural beauty and/or ambience but can also be ‘ordinary’ places that are not given statutory protection. Urban landscapes have an important role to play in the quality of people’s lives, therefore acknowledging and enhancing ‘townscapes’ is also important.

3.84 Different landscapes have differing landscape characters. The Landscape Character Network defines landscape character as ‘a distinct, recognisable and consistent pattern of elements in the landscape that makes one landscape different from another, rather than better or worse’19. Essentially it is the landscape character of an area that gives it its distinctive and unique feel.

What is the policy context? 3.85 There is a range of policy available in relation to the heritage and landscape topic at the national,

regional, sub-regional and local level. The key policy documents relevant to the topic are set out below.

National Policy Planning Policy Statement 5: Planning for the Historic Environment (March 2010)

3.86 Planning Policy Statement 5 states that “Planning has a central role to play in conserving our heritage assets and utilising the historic environment in creating sustainable places.”

3.87 The Government’s Objectives for planning for the historic environment are:

• “To deliver sustainable development by ensuring that policies and decisions concerning the historic environment:

- Recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource;

- Take account of the wider social, cultural, economic and environmental benefits of heritage conservation; and

- Recognise that intelligently managed change may sometimes be necessary if heritage assets are to be maintained for the long term.

• To conserve England’s heritage assets in a manner appropriate to their significance by ensuring that:

- Decisions are based on the nature, extent and level of that significance, investigated to a degree proportionate to the importance of the heritage asset;

- Wherever possible, heritage assets are put to an appropriate and viable use that is consistent with their conservation;

- The positive contribution of such heritage assets to local character and sense of place is recognised and valued; and

- Consideration of the historic environment is integrated into planning policies, promoting place-shaping.

19 Landscape Character Network Available at: http://www.landscapecharacter.org.uk/lca Accessed on the 22nd December 2008


45

• To contribute to our knowledge and understanding of our past by ensuring that opportunities are taken to capture evidence from the historic environment and to make this publicly available, particularly where a heritage asset is to be lost.”

Planning Policy Statement 7 (August 2004) and Consultation on Planning Policy Statement: Planning for a Natural and Healthy Environment (March 2010)

3.88 Planning Policy Statement 7 (PPS7) sets out the Government's planning policies for rural areas, including country towns and villages and the wider, largely undeveloped countryside up to the fringes of larger urban areas. The landscape protection, soil and agricultural land quality, and forestry elements of the PPS are to be superseded by the forthcoming PPS on Planning for a Natural and Health Environment.

3.89 A key Objective of this single new PPS is therefore to bring together related policies on the natural environment and on open and green spaces in rural and urban areas to ensure that the planning system delivers healthy sustainable communities which adapt to and are resilient to climate change and gives the appropriate level of protection to the natural environment. This includes the introduction of a strategy for Green Infrastructure.

3.90 The Objectives of the PPS are included in the policy context section of this report for Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna.

European Landscape Convention Natural England’s 2009/2010 Action Plan

3.91 The European Landscape Convention is the first international treaty to be exclusively concerned with the protection, management and enhancement of European landscapes. Natural England is in its second year of implementing the European Landscape Convention (ELC) in England.

3.92 “The ELC definition is short and simple, yet comprehensive: ‘landscape means an area, as perceived by people, whose character is the result of the action and interaction of natural and/or human factors’. The definition is inclusive: it applies to all urban and peri-urban landscapes, towns, villages and rural areas, the coast and inland areas. It also applies to ordinary or even degraded landscape as well as those areas that are outstanding or protected.”

3.93 English Nature’s aim is to “place landscapes and people at the heart of social, economic and environmental decision making so that future generations inherit the highest quality landscape possible. Through integrated landscape management, good planning and design, protection and through public engagement and stakeholder involvement it will lead to wider understanding and appreciation, improved knowledge and care as well as a sense of inspiration, well-being and connection between people and place.”

3.94 An ‘action’ for year two in the action plan is: “building on the completed phase 1 of the NW Landscape Character Framework Phase 2 will be complete by end of March 2010 and will also deliver the interim NCA integrated Objective as well as:

• Provide an evidence base for landscape planning and management, including assessing sensitivity to change, past and current forces for change and potential future pressures.

• Enhance the ‘integrating’ power of the Framework by strengthening biodiversity, historic environment and geodiversity aspects.

• Address gaps in current urban and marine coverage.

• Engage partners and stakeholders.”


46

Sub-Regional Policy Strategy for Heritage Conservation in Lancashire (2003)

3.95 The strategy sets out the need for local authorities to be ‘managers’ of the historic environment and have a statutory duty to ensure that the best architectural and historic buildings and areas are preserved and wherever possible enhanced. The strategy aims to increase awareness of Lancashire’s historic environment, advance knowledge and understanding of the historic environment and to establish and augment a sustainable approach to managing change in the historic environment in Lancashire.

A Landscape Strategy for Lancashire – Landscape Character Assessment (December 2000)

3.96 This document provides a landscape assessment of Lancashire. The strategy identifies four Objectives, of which two are relevant to the land resources theme:

• To classify the landscape into distinct landscape types identifying key characteristics and sensitivities and providing principles to guide landscape change;

• To describe the current appearance of the landscape, classifying it into distinct zones of homogeneous character, summarising the key features of each landscape character area.

Local Policy Fallbarn Conservation Area Appraisal

3.97 The Fallbarn Conservation Area Appraisal is essential to giving fully considered responses to all development proposals within the conservation area and to the area’s future protection and enhancement.

3.98 Other Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans are to be undertaken through funding from English Heritage (see future baseline).

What is the situation now? 3.99 The various townscapes and landscapes that characterise much of the Borough offer

environments that greatly enhance Rossendale’s local distinctiveness. The rural landscapes throughout Rossendale are one of the defining features of the Borough. The Borough has a strong industrial past, which is apparent today in many of the buildings. Bacup has recently been described by English Heritage as one of the best examples of a preserved mill town in the country.

Landscape 3.100 Rossendale contains a variety of different landscape character types and areas that are set out in

the Landscape Strategy for Lancashire (2000), prepared by Lancashire County Council. The broad character area that covers Rossendale is the Southern Pennines. The upland areas in the northern part of Rossendale are classified as the Rossendale Hills. In between the Rossendale Hills are the Settled Valleys and the southern and eastern parts of the Borough are designated as Rossendale Moorland Fringe. The western part of Rossendale is designated as the Haslingden Grane.

3.101 Historic Landscape Characterisation is a method used for understanding and mapping the landscape that we see today with reference to its historical development. There is a variety of different historic landscape classifications located throughout the Borough that reflect current and past land uses. The Borough contains large areas designated as Post-Medieval Enclosures, particularly towards the north-east. There are also a number of areas designated as Moorlands


47

and Reverted Moorlands in the south and west of the Borough. Areas surrounding Haslingden, Rawtenstall, Bacup and Whitworth are designated as Modern Settlements.

Green Belt

3.102 Green Belts are designated in order to check urban sprawl, safeguard the surrounding countryside, prevent neighbouring settlements from merging, preserve the setting and special character of historic towns, and assist urban regeneration. Figure 3.6 below shows the location of Green Belt land within the Rossendale Borough.

3.103 There is a large area of Green Belt land located towards the South East of the Borough, either side of the A671. Another large area of Green Belt that separates Haslingden and Rawtenstall stretches down through the ward of Eden and two smaller areas are located between Waterfoot and Bacup and north of Haslingden.

Figure 3.6 - Green Belt Land in Rossendale

(Source: Rossendale Borough Council – Core Strategy Draft Submission Document 2007)

3.104 There are a number of features of built heritage interest located throughout Rossendale and it is important that these are safeguarded. There are nine conservation areas located throughout the Borough. These comprise the following:

• Rawtenstall Town Centre;

• Higher Cloughfold;

• Bacup Town Centre;

• Chatterton/ Strongstry;

• Irwell Vale;


48

• Goodshawfold;

• Lovesclough Fold;

• Whitworth Square; and

• Fallbarn.

3.105 Within Rossendale, there are no grade 1 Listed Buildings, but there are eight grade II* Listed Buildings, including the Church of St Bartholomew at Whitworth, and Friend’s Meeting House in Crawshawbooth. There are also 255 grade II Listed Buildings in Rossendale.

3.106 There are 142 Scheduled Ancient Monuments located in Lancashire. 29 buildings in Lancashire are on the ‘Heritage at Risk Register’20, which equates to around 20% of the Scheduled Ancient Monuments. This is lower than the average of 42% in the North West.

3.107 Only two scheduled monuments are located in Rossendale, both within the defined urban area for Haslingden. Higher Mill (scheduled monument number La143) includes the mill ponds and trailrace as well as the buildings themselves. Grane Mill (scheduled monument number 34999) comprises the boiler house and boilers, the engine house and engines, a water tank and the mill chimney. Furthermore, Grane Mill is listed on the ‘Heritage at Risk Register’21 as being in poor condition.

Community Health and Equality, Leisure and Education Introduction

3.108 Health and equality, safe communities, access to open space, leisure and education are all fundamental contributors to the quality of life and well being of people living in the Rossendale Borough. The major priority of the Council and its partners is to ensure that people living in Rossendale enjoy a good quality of life.

3.109 Planning can make a positive difference to people’s lives and can help to deliver homes, jobs, and better opportunities for all. The Core Strategy has a significant role to play in delivering social inclusion and preventing exclusion, through setting the pattern of urban growth; developing new facilities (or improving existing ones); ensuring that a choice of transport is available to maximise accessibility; and dealing with crime and safety issues.

What is the policy context? National Policy Planning Policy Guidance 13 – Transport (2001)

3.110 The PPG aims to promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling and to reduce the need to travel, especially by car.

Planning Policy Guidance 24 – Noise (1994)

3.111 The aim of the guidance is to provide advice on how the planning system can be used to minimise the adverse impact of noise without placing unreasonable restrictions on development or adding unduly to the costs and administrative burdens of business. It outlines the

20 English Heritage [accessed 2009] Heritage at Risk Registers 21 English Heritage [accessed 2009] Heritage at Risk Registers


49

considerations to be taken into account in determining planning applications both for noise-sensitive developments and for those activities which generate noise.

Planning Policy Statement (1) on Delivering Sustainable Development (January 2005)

3.112 The Government’s Planning Policy Statement on Delivering Sustainable Development (PPS1, 2005) sets out guiding principles that place the concept of sustainable development at the heart of planning; identifying the need to make suitable land available for development in line with economic, social and environmental Objectives. At the heart of sustainable development is the simple idea of ensuring a better quality of life for everyone, now and for future generations.

3.113 Of particular relevance to Community Health and Equality, Leisure and Education, Development Plan Policies should:

• Promote communities which are inclusive, healthy, safe and crime free, whilst respecting the diverse needs of communities and the special needs of particular sectors of the community;

• Create safe and accessible environments where crime and disorder or fear of crime does not undermine quality of life or community cohesion;

• Seek to maintain and improve the local environment and help to mitigate the effects of declining environmental quality through positive policies on issues such as design, conservation and the provision of public space.

3.114 Likewise, Sustainable Communities: People, Places and Prosperity (2005) promotes prosperity for all, through promotion of good governance, empowering communities and tackling disadvantage.

Planning Policy Guidance 17 'Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation' (July 2002)

3.115 In terms of health and open space, the main Objectives of the PPG are for local authorities to set locally derived standards for the provision of open space and recreation facilities, protect existing facilities which are of high quality and value and to see no net loss of open space. PPG17 states open spaces, sport and recreation should support urban renaissance, rural renewal, promotion of social inclusion and community cohesion, health and well being and promoting more sustainable development. It also states that local authorities should:

• Avoid any erosion of recreational function and maintain or enhance the character of open spaces;

• Ensure that open spaces do not suffer from increased overlooking, traffic flows or other encroachment;

• Protect and enhance those parts of the rights of way network that might benefit open space; and

• Consider the impact of any development on biodiversity and nature conservation.

Regional Policy 3.116 Building sustainable communities is a regional priority. Communities should meet the diverse

needs of existing and future residents, promote community cohesion and equality and diversity, be sensitive to the environment and contribute to a high quality of life.

Investment for health: A Plan for the North West of England (2003)

3.117 The plan seeks to achieve significant reductions in health inequalities between groups and areas in the North West, within a framework of sustainable development that supports economic, social and environmental regeneration.


50

3.118 The strategy as a whole is underpinned by four key principles:

• The primacy of prevention, on the basis that interventions which prevent the causes, and reduce the consequences of health inequalities, will have the greatest long term impact;

• Ensuring that mainstream services are responsive to the needs of disadvantaged populations;

• Using targeted interventions to test innovative approaches, or to tackle specific problems and to reach particular priority groups; and

• Using mainstream planning, performance management and monitoring of services to support local and national action.

Lancashire County Council economic strategy and sub-regional action plan (2006)

3.119 In terms of education and skills, the plan defines four drivers which are needed to address the economic challenges facing the sub region, which include:

• Higher value activity and investment;

• Investing in people;

• Employment generation and entrepreneurship; and

• Investment in quality of place.

3.120 In order to achieve these drivers, the strategy highlights the need for improved learning and educational attainment through attracting and retaining higher value skills (leading to the enhancement of the economy and up-skilling of the workforce to participate in opportunities created.

Rights of Way Improvement Plan for Lancashire (June 2005)

3.121 The Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000 introduced a requirement for every highway authority in England and Wales to prepare a Rights of Way Improvement Plan. The Plan has been developed with the following intentions:

• To use the Plan preparation process as an opportunity to undertake a strategic overview of the access opportunities available within Lancashire’s countryside;

• To improve the network of local rights of way, within the powers available to us, to better meet the needs of local people (including those with impaired vision and reduced mobility) and our visitors;

• To increase the public’s enjoyment and the benefits it derives from the Lancashire countryside; and

• To monitor the improvements against clear targets during the life of the Plan.

Local Policy Rossendale Alive: Our Sustainable Community Strategy 2008 - 2018

3.122 This Sustainable Community Strategy is the overarching strategy for Rossendale. It is simply a long-term plan for Rossendale’s success. The overarching principles for the Strategy are:

• Reducing inequalities;

• Community engagement and development; and

• Community cohesion - promoting equality and valuing diversity.


51

Rossendale Alive: Health and Wellbeing Strategy 2008 - 2018

3.123 The Rossendale Partnership’s Sustainable Community Strategy 2008-2018 has a vision, under the People Priority that “by 2018 Rossendale will be a place which is home to healthy, energised and integrated communities who are strong, resilient and able to organise themselves. Our communities will celebrate the rich heritage and cultural opportunities available”.

3.124 The strategy has 7 aims:

• “Increasing the opportunities for Rossendale residents to have a healthy lifestyle.

• Encouraging the development of an attractive, safe and socially desirable community environment - including community safety initiatives, neighbourhood renewal, community relations, local facilities, access to green spaces and social activities.

• Reducing financial exclusion and enabling people to obtain sufficient resources to afford the necessities of life for themselves and their families.

• Increasing the participation by key individuals and organisations in helping to deliver and reinforce vital health messages and encouraging people to live healthy lifestyles - including a healthy workplace project, a scheme to reduce mental ill-health, and training, education, and support to help key individuals and professions to facilitate and promote health and wellbeing.

• Creating a built environment which helps to encourage a healthy lifestyle - including improved domestic energy efficiency measures, indoor pollution control, home maintenance, accident prevention, home adaptations, development and building control, health campus and other health facilities.

• Protecting and improving the natural environment in order to provide a safe, accessible, attractive and interesting environment that will encourage outdoor activity - including the creation of allotments, green spaces and woodland, and accessible footpath systems.

• Adapting to and mitigating the effects of climate change on the health of people in Rossendale through flood protection, adapting to the risks of excessive heat and cold and sustainable forward planning policies.”

Rossendale Borough Council Community Safety Partnership -Community Safety Plan (April 2008 to March 2011)

3.125 At the local level the plan sets out a number of Objectives:

• To reduce violent crime (including Domestic Abuse);

• To reduce serious acquisitive crime (domestic burglary, vehicle crime and robbery);

• To reduce criminal damage;

• To reduce the harm caused by substance misuse (drugs and alcohol);

• To reduce the re-offending rate of prolific and priority offenders;

• To ensure a co-ordinated approach to working with young people;

• To support community cohesion;

• Improve response to anti social behaviour and improve public reassurance;

• Respond to quality of life issues (inc. environmental, road safety, fire safety); and

• To develop the Partnership in order to meet the six Hallmarks of Effective Partnership.


52

Rossendale Borough Council Economic Strategy 2008-2011

3.126 Relevant strategic Objectives mentioned within Rossendale Borough Council Economic Strategy 2008-2011 include:

• Address local transport and accessibility issues within the Borough, particular the transport links along the valley and look at more sustainable ways of connecting people with employment and learning opportunities outside of the Borough;

• Work with and influence training and education providers to deliver an appropriate skills agenda for Rossendale; and

• Address the barriers that prevent those people that are disadvantaged in any way from accessing the labour market either through employment or self-employment.

3.127 The Rossendale Borough Council Community Strategy 2008-2018 overarching principles include:

• Reducing inequalities;

• Community engagement and development; and

• Community cohesion – promoting equality and valuing diversity.

What is the situation now? Index of Multiple Deprivation

3.128 There are a range of deprivation indicators that have been developed to assist in assessing and comparing ‘deprivation’ or poverty, at local, regional or national level. The most up to date Index of Deprivation22 is the English Indices of Deprivation 2007 (IMD 2007). The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) indicates that Rossendale’s overall deprivation score and rank is 92 out of the 376 English Local Authorities, with 1 being the worst and 376 the best. The best performing Lower Super Output Areas (LOSAs) are located in the wards of Eden, Helmshore and Cribden. The worst performing LSOAs are located in the central areas of Rossendale and are within the wards of Worsley, Healey and Whitworth and Longholme.

3.129 The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) indicates that there is a significant need to improve the health and life expectancy of people living in Rossendale.

3.130 Life expectancy in Rossendale for both males and females is below the average for the North West and is around 1.5 years lower in Rossendale than the Great Britain average.

Health

3.131 There is a very strong correlation between deprivation, lifestyle and poor health. Either through lack of choice or low aspirations, many residents have lifestyles that actively contribute to adverse health outcomes.

3.132 The IMD 2007 domain for health deprivation in England places Rossendale as the 46th worst local authority out of 354. Rossendale is the 6th worst performing authority in terms of health deprivation out of the 14 Lancashire authorities and nearly 8% of the working population are permanently sick or disabled. Moreover, there is a need to reduce health inequalities across the Borough with parts of the Healey and Whitworth and Stacksteads wards performing worst in

22 The Index of Multiple Deprivation is the Government’s official measure of multiple deprivation at small area level. The Index of Multiple Deprivation 2007 (IMD 2007) which forms part of the ID 2007 is based on the small area geography known as Lower Super Output Areas (LSOAs). LSOAs have between 1000 and 3000 people living in them with an average population of 1500 people. In most cases, these are smaller than wards, thus allowing the identification of small pockets of deprivation. There are 32,482 LSOAs in England. The LSOA ranked 1 by the IMD 2007 is the most deprived and that ranked 32,482 is the least deprived.


53

terms of health deprivation. 20% of lower super output areas LSOAs are in the worst 10% in the country.

3.133 Furthermore, Rossendale has an ageing population. The population in the 15-24 and 24-44 age band in Rossendale is lower than both the North West and the England and Wales average.

Education and Skills

3.134 The IMD 2007 domain for education deprivation in England places Rossendale as the 150th worst local authority out of 354. This represents a drop of 8 places since 2004.

3.135 The percentage within Rossendale that have a qualification at both NVQ1 and NVQ2 are higher than the regional and the Great Britain average. The percentage with no qualifications is also lower than the regional and Great Britain average.

3.136 However, the percentage with qualifications at NVQ3 and NVQ4 is below the regional and Great Britain average. In terms of attainment at NVQ4, Rossendale is 6.3% lower than the Great Britain average with areas of Longholme, Hareholme, Stacksteads and Greensclough performing particularly badly on this IMD.

3.137 Unemployment within Rossendale is low and the economic activity rate is significantly above the regional and national averages. However, wage rates within the Borough are low, with people working in Rossendale earning a median weekly average of £328.60. This is well below the regional average of £451.30 and the national average of £479.30. This gap in wages is the largest in Lancashire.

Accessibility

3.138 The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) suggests that accessibility to some key services within Rossendale is a problem and there is a need to ensure equal access to facilities for all members of the community across Rossendale. Hospitals are the least accessible facility in both rural and urban areas in Rossendale. Accessibility to bank/building society facilities, leisure facilities and a doctor is also a problem in Rossendale.

Leisure

3.139 Provision of opportunities for recreation, sport and play create opportunities to maintain an active and healthy lifestyle. The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) suggests there is a lack of amenity green space, play spaces for children and young people and outdoor sports provision within Rossendale. There is also a need to upgrade sports facilities to reach an adequate standard. The LDF must seek to ensure that new development includes appropriate provision for open space and recreational facilities either on site, or through alternative provision, with an emphasis on quality and accessibility. Planning Policy can help deliver sustainable residential environments with access to open spaces and green corridors.

Local Economy and Employment, including Tourism Introduction

3.140 The performance of the economy has a fundamental bearing on the achievement of sustainable development. The economy provides employment and generates wealth, but can as a result generate adverse effects, such as waste or pollution from industry or traffic. Economic growth can help tackle deprivation and support regeneration.


54

3.141 Planning policy can support inward investment and new business formation through the supply of land allocated for employment development. The Core Strategy will provide a framework to protect and enhance existing employment areas and support appropriate new employment land.

3.142 The Core Strategy will need to take a spatial approach to the location of new employment. New economic development will need to be located in sustainable locations that are accessible to residential areas and well served by public transport.

What is the policy context? 3.143 There are a number of planning policy guidance documents relating to employment and the local

economy including tourism, ranging from Government white papers to local strategies. Key messages from these documents are discussed below.

National Policy 3.144 The economy is a diverse issue with planning policy and guidance contained within a number of

Planning Policy Statements and Guidance Notes. These are principally PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development and PPS4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth.

Planning Policy 4: Planning for Sustainable Economic Growth (December 2009)

3.145 National planning policy relating to sustainable economic growth states that planning should:

• “Build prosperous communities by improving the economic performance of cities, towns, regions, sub-regions and local areas, both urban and rural

• Reduce the gap in economic growth rates between regions, promoting regeneration and tackling deprivation deliver more sustainable patterns of development, reduce the need to travel, especially by car and respond to climate change (in line with PPS1);

• Promote the vitality and viability of town and other centres as important places for communities. To do this, the Government wants:

- New economic growth and development of main town centre uses to be focused in existing centres, with the aim of offering a wide range of services to communities in an attractive and safe environment and remedying deficiencies in provision in areas with poor access to facilities;

- Competition between retailers and enhanced consumer choice through the provision of innovative and efficient shopping, leisure, tourism and local services in town centres, which allow genuine choice to meet the needs of the entire community (particularly socially excluded groups)

- The historic, archaeological and architectural heritage of centres to be conserved and, where appropriate, enhanced to provide a sense of place and a focus for the community and for civic activity

• Raise the quality of life and the environment in rural areas by promoting thriving, inclusive and locally distinctive rural communities whilst continuing to protect the open countryside for the benefit of all.”

Regional Policy 3.146 Regional policy23 relating to the outer part of the Central Lancashire City Region (which includes

Rossendale) states that Plans and strategies should focus on:

23 Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West: The North West Plan (GONW, 2008)


55

• Regeneration and restructuring of the East Lancashire economy (including actions taken under the Elevate Transformational Agenda);

• Enhanced educational opportunities which will improve the skill-base of the resident population;

• Improve the City Region’s internal and external transport links;

• Improve the accessibility of employment locations by sustainable transport modes, with priority given to the Elevate Housing Renewal Pathfinder area; and

• Support and diversify the rural economy and improve access to services in the rural areas.

3.147 Regional policy seeks to achieve higher levels of productivity and performance from businesses operating in the visitor economy.

3.148 Echoing national planning policy, regional planning policy aims to develop and encourage employment creation in or near deprived areas and develop business start up and support services in Rossendale.

3.149 The North West Regional Economic Strategy (2006) outlines a number of key Objectives for Lancashire, these include:

• Increasing economic activity rates in areas such as East Lancashire;

• Improving basic and higher level skills and qualification levels;

• Stimulating enterprise;

• Accelerating transition to higher value advanced manufacturing;

• Improve productivity of service sector businesses;

• Improving intra- and inter- city region connectivity;

• Develop regionally significant, high quality locations for business; and

• Expanding the role of higher education in the city region.

Local and Sub-Regional Policy 3.150 The Strategy aims to:

• Increase the share of businesses participating in the knowledge economy;

• Increase business investment in higher value activity;

• Increase the amount of employment within the knowledge economy.

Rossendale Economic Strategy 2008-2011

3.151 The plan sets out a number of key Objectives and opportunities, these include:

• Exploit the position of Rossendale within the region;

• Embrace the regional and sub-regional agendas so that their benefits to Rossendale can be maximised;

• Deliver the two town centre masterplans in Rawtenstall and Bacup;

• The potential of the Adrenaline Gateway concept to deliver a nationally important facility into the area that could have direct and indirect economic benefits across the sub region and region;


56

• Maximise the resources that are already committed to the Borough through existing programmes such as the Sustainable Economic Development Programme;

• Recognise the potential of the arts as an economic driver particularly in attracting more people and visitors to the Borough; and

• Provide an alternative, semi-rural, business location with different locational advantages from more commercially developed areas of the city region.

Tourism Marketing Action Plan (2005)

3.152 The Council’s plan aims to:

• Raise the profile of Rossendale and the Borough as a visitor and business tourism destination;

• Increase visitor traffic to Rossendale;

• Increase awareness of Rossendale’s facilities and resources; and

• Increase value of tourism in Rossendale by encouraging visitors to extend their stay and increase spending.

What is the situation now? 3.153 Rossendale’s economy is shaped inextricably by the area’s geography and location. It covers an

area of the western Pennine Hills, with settlements lying in the valley of the River Irwell and its tributaries. Flat land is therefore at a premium.

3.154 Historically the farming and cottage woollen industries formed the backbone of Rossendale’s local economy. However, like so many other manufacturing areas, the Borough experienced sharp economic decline during the late 1980s - 1990s.

3.155 The Borough’s location close to the Manchester conurbation and Rossendale’s attractive environment have made the area desirable to those who wish to commute to Manchester but reside in a rural environment.

Economic Activity and Employment

3.156 The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) indicates that by national standards, Rossendale’s economy is weak in terms of its local productivity levels and economic growth.

3.157 Rossendale District recorded a very sharp decline in its level of employment over recent years. The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) indicates that there has been a net loss of 15.9% of jobs in the Borough since 1998. The loss of thousands of jobs in the travel agencies and tour operators sector between the two time periods was the major reason behind the substantial reduction. More recent closures and job cuts around the Rossendale valley also increased the reduction in jobs. The Manufacturing sector, though operating at a shadow of its former strength, still employs just less than a quarter of the Borough’s workforce.

3.158 The Borough is struggling to compete with other Lancashire districts with strong economic bases in ‘high value’, knowledge-driven industries, such as Fylde and Preston. There is a significant mismatch in terms of local skills levels and employment opportunities, as indicated by the high levels of out-commuting and the high numbers of residents that work outside Rossendale. The Borough experiences high youth unemployment rates (13%).

3.159 Despite its economic weaknesses in terms of economic growth, Rossendale recorded a good employment rate of 75.3% in 2007, slightly higher than the British average. Average workplace weekly earnings in Rossendale are below the national average, but are much higher when measured by place of residence than by place of work.


57

3.160 The average household income in Rossendale, at an estimated £32,400 in 2008, was 94% of that in Great Britain, but 2% above the Lancashire sub-regional average. This was the 6th highest amongst the 14 county and unitary districts. Five or 36% of Rossendale wards had average household incomes above the Great Britain average and six or 43% were above the Lancashire average. Cribden ward (£39,100) had the highest local average income, 14% above the national average and ranking as 43rd out of the 301 Lancashire wards. Average income in Stacksteads (£26,500) Rossendale's lowest ranking ward, was only 68% of that in Cribden and stood at 77% of the Great Britain average.

Business and Enterprise

3.161 According to the ‘State of Rossendale: An Economic, Social and Environmental Profile of Rossendale Report’, a relatively healthy business enterprise base and a growth of employment in knowledge driven sectors (albeit from a lower base) stand out as the most important economic assets of the local economy. The report indicates that enterprise culture in Rossendale is average, ranking the district 6th out of 14 in Lancashire and 216th within Britain. The business stock in Borough is dominated by small businesses, average business size in the Borough is below the average, indicating the absence of major employers.

3.162 As illustrated in the Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009), between 1994 - 2007 business stock growth in Rossendale was rather modest, showing a net increase over the full period of about 8.9%, compared to 22% across the UK and 12.4% across Lancashire.

Retail and Tourism

3.163 Rawtenstall is the main shopping centre within the Borough. The other three town centres in the Borough (Bacup, Haslingden and Waterfoot) are smaller, serving a more localised catchment. In addition to the four town centres, there are several local centres within the Borough.

3.164 All centres compete for retail expenditure with a number of major shopping destinations just outside the Borough. In particular the sub-regional centres of Bury and Bolton to the south of Rossendale, Burnley to the north and Blackburn to the North West, attract significant elements of trade from the Borough. Other larger centres, however, including Accrington, Manchester and Rochdale also draw shoppers and other visitors from Rossendale.

3.165 Management Horizons’ Europe (MHE) UK Shopping Index 2003/2004 provides an index of retail centres, on the basis of a weighted score for multiple retailers represented in each centre. Rawtenstall is the only ranked centre in Rossendale, at 863 out of 1,672 centres across Great Britain, and has fallen from its previous placing in 2000-2001 (828). The other main towns in Rossendale do not appear in the shopping index, reflecting their localised roles and the limited number of multiples in each of those centres.

3.166 The Rossendale Retail Capacity Study (2005) found that vacancy levels within the Borough are relatively high, with levels significantly above the national average in a number of centres, including Bacup and Haslingden. The vacancy rate in Rawtenstall was found to be similar to the national average. The overall vacancy rate in the Borough is 16.0% compared with the national average of 10.7%.

3.167 In terms of Tourism, the STEAM (Scarborough Tourism Activity Monitor) Report for Lancashire 2006 identifies that the tourism sector generates some £65.55m of expenditure in the Borough; this was the lowest amount of expenditure generated by tourism in any district in Lancashire in 2006.


58

Transportation Introduction

3.168 Transportation networks play a critically important role in the sustainable development of a Borough, enabling people and goods to move around and through it. Rossendale’s transportation networks are vital for those living, working and visiting the area, delivering local accessibility to key locations and also connectivity to wider, sub-regional networks.

3.169 Ensuring that residents and visitors have a choice of sustainable modes of travel, including public transport, walking and cycling helps to deliver increased accessibility to key employment, education, training and leisure opportunities as well as improving health and well-being.

3.170 Similarly, many businesses require an efficient local transport network, so ensuring that new development is located centrally or is accessible by a variety of transport modes helps to increase accessibility to goods, services and amenities and to secure the viability of their operations.

3.171 Therefore, it is important to ensure that transport infrastructure is able to safely and efficiently cope with demand and provide choice of transportation, thereby reducing the impact of congestion on the Borough’s roads.

3.172 In assessing the sustainability of the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward in relation to transport issues, the following SA Objective has been identified as the most relevant to assess the Preferred Options against:

What is the policy context? National Policy

3.173 The key national policy documents that set the context for transportation issues are:

• PPG13 Transport (2003);

• PPS1 Delivering Sustainable Development (2005);

• Towards a Sustainable Transport System: Supporting Economic Growth in a Low-Carbon World (DfT, 2007); and

• The Transport White Paper: The Future of Transport – A Network for 2030 (2004).

3.174 Between them, these documents guide Local Development Documents, Local Transport Plans and transport proposals to:

• Be complementary and linked in relation to priorities and investment (this also includes at the regional and national level).

• Aim to break down unnecessary barriers and exclusions in a manner that benefits the entire community, including reducing crime and the fear of crime and ensuring secure community safety and road safety.

• Give priority to people over ease of traffic movement by providing more road space to pedestrians, cyclists and public transport in town centres, local neighbourhoods and other areas with a mixture of land uses.

• Contain clear, comprehensive and inclusive access policies by making maximum use of the most accessible sites, such as those in town centres and others which are, or will be, close to major transport interchanges.


59

• Promote accessibility to jobs, shopping, leisure facilities and services by public transport, walking and cycling and reduce the need to travel, especially by car, thus maximising competitiveness and productivity and promoting greater equality and choice of transport opportunity.

• Account for the needs of disabled people as pedestrians, public transport users and motorists.

• Reduce transport’s emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases and improve air quality, thereby contributing to better health and improving the quality of life, including a healthy natural environment.

Regional Policy 3.175 The Lancashire Local Transport Plan (2006-2010) aims to: improve accessibility; address

congestion issues; improve air quality; create safer roads; and address quality of life issues.

3.176 The Joint Lancashire Local Transport Plan 2011-2021 will be guided by the five broad Objectives set out by the Department for Transport in DaSTS – Delivering a Sustainable Transport Strategy. These are:

• To support national economic competitiveness and growth, by delivering reliable and efficient transport networks;

• To reduce transport’s emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases, with the desired outcome of tackling climate change;

• To contribute to better safety security and health and longer life-expectancy by reducing the risk of death, injury or illness arising from transport and by promoting travel modes that are beneficial to health;

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

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

Local Policy 3.177 Rossendale Alive: Our Sustainable Community Strategy 2008-2018 aims to achieve a

sustainable Rossendale through a series of actions. In relation to transport the aim is to create opportunities to encourage a shift in transport modes towards sustainable and active travel. The Strategy also seeks to further improve transport connectivity between the east and west of Rossendale and to the moorlands in the Borough.

What is the situation now? 3.178 Rossendale has no train stations or active rail lines other than the East Lancashire Railway

(which is currently more a tourist attraction than a public transport service) and therefore relies on access by road, be that by private motor vehicle or public buses. The road network is constrained by the topography of the Borough, with all main routes generally following the path of valley bottoms into and through the Borough.

3.179 The M66 / A56 is the main southern route into the Borough, which continues north through the western part of the Borough (and Haslingden) and onto the East Lancashire towns of Burnley and Accrington and the M65 motorway. The A681 travels east from the A56 corridor through Rawtenstall and Bacup, with other key roads such as the A682 and A671 accessed from the A681 to travel to the northern and south-eastern parts of the Borough respectively. Bus routes


60

are provided on all these major routes, and some other routes, although service provision in the south east is not as good as elsewhere.

3.180 Statistics on the population of Rossendale’s travel and transport patterns show a population that travel shorter distances than the national average but that use the car and buses more than the equivalent areas elsewhere in Lancashire, with the car being by far the dominant mode of transport. The percentage of people that walk to work in Rossendale is low compared to other urban areas of Lancashire. These statistics are to be expected given the social and cultural context of Rossendale, the lack of options in relation to transport modes in the Borough and the topography of the Borough.

3.181 However, surprisingly given the reliance on the car, levels of car ownership in Rossendale are lower than the Lancashire and national averages and road casualty rates are lower, but this is likely reflective of the low numbers of households in the Borough compared to other Local Authorities and the limited financial means of many of those households.

Housing Introduction

3.182 In order to ensure the development of sustainable communities in Rossendale, the LDF must ensure the availability of sufficient housing to meet identified needs, in terms of housing quantity, location, quality, affordability and choice.

3.183 Rossendale is nestled in the Pennines and its development has been influenced by its geography and natural resources. The narrow urban valley of the River Irwell, running between the Pennine uplands means that there are a limited number of accessible sites for housing.

3.184 This Sustainability Appraisal will need to have regard to national, regional and sub-regional pressures, demographic changes in Rossendale and climate change, with an increasing need to ensure that development is located, designed and constructed sustainably.

What is the policy context? 3.185 There are a number of planning policy guidance documents relating to housing, ranging from

Government white papers to local strategies. Key messages from these documents are discussed below.

National Policy 3.186 National planning policy for housing is set out in a number of documents.

3.187 PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development (2005) states that planning policies should promote high quality inclusive design in the layout of new developments and individual buildings in terms of function and impact, not just for the short term but over the lifetime of the development. Design which fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area should not be accepted.

3.188 PPS: Planning and Climate Change, Supplement to PPS1 (December 2007) sets out policies to ensure that all new house building moves towards the highest level of sustainability.

Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing (June 2010)

3.189 PPS3 sets out the national planning policy framework for delivering the Government’s housing Objectives.

3.190 The goal is to ensure that everyone has the opportunity of living in a decent home, which they can afford, in a community where they want to live. In support of its Objective of creating mixed


61

and sustainable communities, the Government’s policy is to ensure that housing is developed in suitable locations which offer a range of community facilities and with good access to jobs, key services and infrastructure. The priority for development is the effective use of previously developed land.

3.191 The specific outcomes that the planning system should deliver are:

• High quality housing that is well-designed and built to a high standard (including the Code for Sustainable Homes as included under the PPS1 supplement on Climate Change);

• A mix of housing, both market and affordable, particularly in terms of tenure and price, to support a wide variety of households in all areas, both urban and rural;

• A sufficient quantity of housing taking into account need and demand and seeking to improve choice;

• Housing developments in suitable locations, which offer a good range of community facilities and with good access to jobs, key services and infrastructure; and

• A flexible, responsive supply of land – managed in a way that makes efficient and effective use of land, including re-use of previously-developed land, where appropriate.

Sub-Regional Policy Pennine Lancashire Housing Strategy 2009 - 2029

3.192 The strategy has three cross cutting Objectives linked with the PLIES and the Sustainable Communities Strategy of each partner local authority.

• To ensure a sufficient quantity, high quality, and appropriate type of housing supply to meet the economic aspirations and social needs of Pennine Lancashire.

• To develop sustainable neighbourhoods that can retain successful households and offer opportunities to inward movers and investors, reducing the disparities between neighbourhoods within Pennine Lancashire, providing linkages to economic growth and employment opportunities and improving overall economic performance in relation to the region.

• To meet the housing, health and support needs of our residents and vulnerable people, promoting better services, more choice, accessible and integrated fully into local communities.

Local Policy Rossendale Homelessness Strategy 2008-2013 (2008)

3.193 At the local level, the plan sets out a number of key aims these are:

• To prevent homelessness;

• To develop multi agency initiatives, agreements and protocols that help to prevent homelessness and minimise its occurrence;

• To provide a safety net of accommodation and support to help prevent homeless people from becoming homeless again, whilst reducing the use of bed and breakfast as temporary accommodation;

• To monitor changing needs and add actions as appropriate, and to keep partner agencies informed on progress against targets; and

• To help enable Rossendale to meet relevant local, regional and national targets.


62

What is the situation now? 3.194 Rossendale has a number of self-contained housing market areas, focused on the main towns

within the Borough. Areas on the edges of towns and particularly those in rural areas are strongly influenced by the commuter market. Rossendale is readily accessible to Bury, Rochdale, Oldham and Manchester and prices are generally cheaper than those commanded in Greater Manchester. Quality of life factors such as low crime and high quality landscapes all contribute to the area being a popular residential choice.

Housing Tenure and Household Structure

3.195 Within the Borough there is a total of 30,079 dwellings24. The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) indicates that there is a need to balance the housing market by addressing the balance of property type supply, as almost 50% of the stock in Rossendale is of a terraced construction, which can limit the choice of housing options.

3.196 The LDF Scoping Report indicates that in 2008 the proportion of Owner Occupied and Private Rented Dwelling Stock in Rossendale (84.8 %) was higher than the regional (81.2%) and national averages (81.8%). Although the housing tenure is seemingly skewed towards owner occupation, a higher proportion of the population rent housing from a Registered Social Landlord (RSL) (15.2%) than the region (12.9%) and national (9.5%) averages.

Housing Supply

3.197 The LDF Scoping Report suggests that Rossendale is in an overall position of undersupply up to 2020/21, demonstrating an insufficient capacity (based on current permissions) to meet the five-year housing requirement.

House Prices and Affordability

3.198 House prices in Rossendale are lower than the regional and national averages, although buying a property is still out of the reach of many in the housing market. There is significant variation in property prices across the Borough, with areas of high demand and high prices to the west within Helmshore and Edenfield, and areas with low demand, low prices and an acknowledged market failure to the east of the Borough, particularly Bacup, in the Pathfinder area. The variation in property prices results in varying affordability issues across the Borough.

3.199 The Rossendale Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (2008) indicates that there is a growing affordability issue in the Borough. As of 2007, the price to income ratio stood at 5.1 having risen from 3.2 in 2002.

Housing Condition and Empty Properties

3.200 Rossendale has twice the amount of dwellings classified as unfit compared to the national average and the Borough also suffers from a high number of vacant dwellings. In 2004, 56.8% of local authority owned dwellings in Rossendale were categorised as “non-decent”. This is a reduction in performance from 36.3% in 2001. Moreover, in 2006 9.1% of dwellings in the Borough were classified as unfit, this was double the national average. Helmshore, Cribden Longholme and Healey and Whitworth wards contain the largest percentage of housing in poor condition.

3.201 In April 2006 there were approximately 1,600 empty properties in Rossendale, representing about 5.5% of the housing stock. Roughly half of this number is longer term empty properties. There are particular concentrations of empty properties in the Worsley and Greensclough wards, which

24 ONS Neighbourhood Statistics 2009 available at: http://neighbourhood.statistics.gov.uk


63

account for nearly 1/3 of the total number of vacant properties. These wards have relatively weak housing demand and lower than average household incomes.

Homelessness

3.202 In terms of homelessness, large-scale reductions have occurred in officially designated homeless numbers at the sub-regional and local level. During 2002/03 to 2007/08 Rossendale experienced a percentage yearly decrease of on average 82%. In 2007, 80 households were officially recognised as newly homeless in Rossendale; this represents 0.29% of the total number of households.

Housing Market Renewal

3.203 The Elevate East Lancashire Market Renewal Pathfinder focuses on five local authority areas in East Lancashire – Blackburn with Darwen, Burnley, Hyndburn, Pendle and Rossendale. For Rossendale, Elevate’s intervention programme is concentrated within the areas of Bacup, Stacksteads and Britannia and covers just over 5,500 dwellings. Intervention in Rossendale is less than other areas in the East Lancashire sub region, and inclusion in the Pathfinder has occurred at a later stage. The key area for intervention is Bacup and Stacksteads.


64

4. Key Sustainability Issues and Opportunities

4.1 This section interprets the identification of the baseline conditions for Rossendale Borough, summarising the key local sustainability issues that should be addressed through the LDF policies. The identification of key sustainability issues, combined with the relevant Objectives from the national, regional and local policy context, form the basis of the development of the Sustainability Appraisal Framework (Table 5.1). The key sustainability issues that have been identified through the establishment of the baseline are listed below. Further detail in relation to the baseline can be found in section 3.

Table 4.1 – Key Sustainability Issues

Key Sustainability Issue/Opportunity and Implication for the Core Strategy

Relevant SEA topic

SA Obj.

Potential effect on international sites Although there are no Natura 2000 sites located within the Rossendale Borough, there are four that lie outside the Borough boundary that could be affected by the policies in Rossendale’s Core Strategy. These are: • Rochdale Canal Special Area of Conservation (SAC); • South Pennine SAC; • Peak District Moors Special Protection Area (SPA); and • South Pennine Moors Phase 2 SPA.

Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

2

Threat from development and climate change on local biodiversity Biodiversity designations within the Borough may be at threat from an increase in development in the Borough, as well as climate change. The designations are: • Healey Dell Local Nature Reserve (LNR); • Lower Red Lees Pasture SSSI (condition: unfavourable

declining); • Hodge Clough SSSI (condition: favourable); and • Lee Quarry (condition: favourable). Species and habitats will seek to adapt to climate change, but are likely to be constrained in their ability to do so if development leads to fragmented landscapes and insufficient or poorly distributed semi-natural habitat space. Without action through the LDF to maintain the connectivity of habitats, effects from development are likely to be harmful.

Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

2

Threat from development on local geodiversity There are seven RIGS (the most important places for geology and geomorphology outside statutorily protected land) located within Rossendale. The integrity of these sites should be protected through the LDF policies.

Landscape, Soil, Material Assets

2

Large areas of contaminated land Large areas of contaminated land are located within the Facit and Shawforth ward and in Stacksteads. There are also pockets of

Landscape, Soil, Material Assets

7


65


Relevant SEA topic

SA Obj.

contaminated land within Whitwell, Longholme, Hareholme, Cribden, Goodshaw, Worsley, Helmshore and Greenfield. The core strategy should ensure that land is remediated through the Town and Country Planning process in such a way that it will not require further future remediation through the Part 2A process set out in the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

Poor water quality During the industrial revolution large sections of the River Irwell were canalised or culverted as it wove behind factories and industrial areas. The prolonged industrial usage took its toll on the river and caused severe pollution. In recent years, the rivers of Rossendale have improved greatly. Water quality has improved and the rivers can now support a range of fauna. Although the quality of river waters in the North West has improved in recent years, the region does still contain about one third of the poorest quality rivers in England. Deculverting and the restoration of natural channels will not only improve water quality, but will contribute to the Objectives of the WFD. The Core Strategy should seek to deliver environmental enhancement including the water environment.

Water, Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna, Climatic Factors, Soil

3, 5

Low implementation of renewable energy generative capacity Only 0.006 MW of renewable energy was installed and completed in Rossendale in 2007/08. However, 65.316 MW of renewable energy generation (facilities) was granted permission within the Rossendale Borough. Rossendale is an attractive area for wind energy developers as it has a significant wind resource. Scout Moor is the largest onshore wind farm in England. The South Pennine Renewable Energy Study (Maslen 2010) identifies wind as the most easily captured renewable energy resource in Rossendale. The LDF should seek to encourage the generation of energy from both zero and low carbon energy sources.

Climatic Factors, Population

6

Flood risk The effects of climate change are a concern for the Borough, in particular increased flood risk. The River Irwell that passes through the Borough increases the risk of flooding in certain areas. Urban locations within the study area that are potentially affected by flooding include parts of Bacup, Haslingden, Rawtenstall and Whitworth. It is vital that any new development within Rossendale considers the risk of flooding and directs development away from this risk through the LDF.

Climatic Factors, Water, Landscape

4, 5

High level of local distinctiveness The various townscapes and landscapes that characterise much of the Borough offer environments that greatly enhance Rossendale’s local distinctiveness. The rural landscapes throughout Rossendale are one of the defining features of the Borough. The Borough has a strong industrial past, which is apparent today in many of the buildings. There are nine Conservation Areas located throughout the Borough. There are two Scheduled Monuments in Rossendale, both within the defined urban area for Haslingden. This local distinctiveness should be maintained and, where possible, enhanced through the LDF policies.

Cultural Heritage, Population, Material Assets

1


66


Relevant SEA topic

SA Obj.

Need for protection of designated Green Belt There is a large area of Green Belt land located towards the South East of the Borough, either side of the A671. Another large area of Green Belt that separates Haslingden and Rawtenstall stretches down through the ward of Eden and two smaller areas are located between Waterfoot and Bacup and north of Haslingden. The LDF policies should consider the need to protect areas designated as Green Belt in line with national policy.

Landscape, Biodiversity, Human Health

1

High levels of deprivation and poor accessibility to health services The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) indicates that Rossendale’s overall deprivation score and rank is 92 out of the 376 English Local Authorities, with 1 being the worst and 376 the best. The best performing Lower Super Output Areas (LSOAs) are located in the wards of Eden, Helmshore and Cribden. The worst performing LSOAs are located in the central areas of Rossendale and are within the wards of Worsley, Healey and Whitworth and Longholme. Rossendale is the 6th worst performing authority in terms of health deprivation out of the 14 Lancashire authorities and nearly 8% of the working population are permanently sick or disabled. Moreover, there is a need to reduce health inequalities across the Borough with parts of the Healey and Whitworth and Stacksteads wards performing worst in terms of health deprivation. 20% of lower super output areas LSOAs are in the worst 10% in the country.

Population, Human Health

11, 12

Ageing population The increase in the number of older people in the Borough is a key sustainability issue. An ageing population will have economic implications for the Borough as fewer members of the population will be economically active and demand for supported housing and services for older people are likely to grow dramatically. The LDF should also seek to ensure that new health care facilities are carefully located so that they are easily accessible by public transport, especially from areas of the Borough with low car ownership.


11, 12

Increase in education deprivation The IMD 2007 domain for education deprivation in England places Rossendale as the 150th worst local authority out of 354. This represents a drop of 8 places since 2004. The LDF CS should seek to improve educational provision and access to educational services through the allocation of land for employment and education in accessible locations.


13

High levels of unemployment mis-match of local skills with employment opportunities The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) indicates that by national standards, Rossendale’s economy is weak in terms of its local productivity levels and economic growth. Rossendale District recorded a very sharp decline in its level of employment over recent years. There is a significant mismatch in terms of local skills levels and employment opportunities, as indicated by the high levels of out-commuting and the high numbers of residents that work outside


13, 14, 15, 16


67


Relevant SEA topic

SA Obj.

Rossendale. The Borough experiences high youth unemployment rates (13%).The LDF should seek to encourage the growth of a diverse economy that meets the skills and aspirations of the local community.

High retail vacancy levels The Rossendale Retail Capacity Study (2005) found that vacancy levels within the Borough are relatively high, with levels significantly above the national average in a number of centres, including Bacup and Haslingden. The LDF should seek to improve the vitality and viability of local centres.

Population 16

Low comparative revenue from tourism In terms of Tourism, the STEAM (Scarborough Tourism Activity Monitor) Report for Lancashire 2006 identifies that the tourism sector generates some £65.55m of expenditure in the Borough; this was the lowest amount of expenditure generated by tourism in any district in Lancashire in 2006. The LDF should seek to promote the diversification of the economy, which may include tourism.

Population, Material Assets

15

Poor accessibility by public transport Rossendale has no train stations or active rail lines other than the East Lancashire Railway (which is currently more a tourist attraction than a public transport service) and therefore relies on access by road, be that by private motor vehicle or public buses. Statistics on the population of Rossendale’s travel and transport patterns show a population that travel shorter distances than the national average but that use the car and buses more than the equivalent areas elsewhere in Lancashire, with the car being by far the dominant mode of transport. However, surprisingly given the reliance on the car, levels of car ownership in Rossendale are lower than the Lancashire and national averages. This is likely reflective of the low numbers of households in the Borough compared to other Local Authorities and the limited financial means of many of those households. The percentage of people that walk to work in Rossendale is low compared to other urban areas of Lancashire. The LDF should seek to reduce the need to travel through the co-location of housing, services, facilities and employment. Where travel is necessary, the LDF should seek that the provision of public transport, walking and cycling facilities are sufficient to comprise most of these trips.

Population, Human Health, Climatic Factors, Air, Landscape

8, 17

Undersupply of housing, poor quality and growing affordability issue The LDF Scoping Report suggests that Rossendale is in an overall position of undersupply up to 2020/21, demonstrating an insufficient capacity (based on current permissions) to meet the five-year housing requirement. The Rossendale Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) (2008) indicates that there is a growing affordability issue in the Borough. As of 2007, the price to income ratio stood at 5.1 having risen from 3.2 in 2002. Rossendale has twice the amount of dwellings classified as unfit compared to the national average and the Borough also suffers from a high number of vacant dwellings. The LDF should seek that an adequate supply of a range of types and tenures of housing is provided in accessible locations

Population, Human Health, Material Assets

10


68


Relevant SEA topic

SA Obj.

throughout the plan area.

Key Sustainability Issues and Opportunities for the LDF Strategy Areas

4.2 Although the key sustainability issues and baseline data collection has been grouped by topic area for simplicity, the issues facing the Borough will be faced by many different areas concurrently. The main sustainability issues, strengths and opportunities facing the key strategy areas are outlined in Table 4.2 to Table 4.7.

Table 4.2 – Issues and Opportunities in Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth

Issues Strengths and Opportunities

• Development constrained by surrounding topography and much of the countryside is designated as Green Belt.

• The town is socially mixed, though this masks some significant deprivation issues (e.g. above average uptake of free school meals.)

• Former mills are becoming unsuitable for modern manufacturing and are falling vacant and into disrepair, under pressure to be developed for non-employment uses.

• Although the community spirit is strong, the town does not have a real centre, with key facilities spread out along its length including several small shopping parades and several informal comments have been made about creating a heart for the town. However, the retail offer is relatively good with independent shops as well as limited national operators.

• Residents have access to a range of key services. (E.g. four primary schools, a secondary school, medical centre, hospital, swimming pool, library and a newly built community centre).

• Leisure opportunities are available with good access to the countryside; Cowm Reservoir regularly hosts competitions for water related sports.

• The settlement is served by a Quality Bus Corridor (the 464 bus), which links Rochdale to Accrington via the Borough’s other key settlements of Bacup, Waterfoot, Rawtenstall and Haslingden. However, the main road is a single carriageway so improvements are limited.

• There is a good mix of housing, and the town has several buildings of historical and architectural interest and contains a conservation area.

Table 4.3 – Issues and Opportunities in Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir


• Poor public realm with high number of vacant, dilapidated buildings

• Anti-social behaviour, poor general health, low skills and educational attainment, high crime, ageing and declining population (18-24 year olds moving away)

• Employment market focused on traditional manufacturing sector

• Housing market failure –generally low

• Distinct sense of place and significant heritage value

• Good access to countryside with potential for tourism and outdoor leisure opportunities (e.g. mountain bike trails, bridleways, hill walking)

• Close to employment opportunities in Rochdale and Burnley

• Quality Bus Corridor linking to Accrington and Rochdale but poor access to


69

house prices and dominance of terraced housing

• Perception of isolation – ‘at the end of the valleys’

• Difficult to deliver sites due to constraints – contamination / market etc

Manchester city centre • Renewable energy potential (wind,

hydroelectric etc) • Proximity to and attraction of the Adrenaline

Gateway project and Lee Quarry • Well established employment sites • Need for additional convenience retail to

widen the offer

Table 4.4 - Issues and Opportunities in Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water


• Amount of vacant and underused buildings and land

• No strategy for bringing vacant and derelict buildings back into use

• Decline in vitality and viability of Waterfoot town centre

• Lack of a clear town centre boundary for Waterfoot

• Increasing number of hot food takeaways

• External perception of congestion • Local heritage poorly maintained • Lack of supporting infrastructure for

leisure and tourism • Retention and promotion of employment

land and facilities • Very little public space or focal points in

Waterfoot

• Good quality bus links to Burnley, Rawtenstall and beyond

• Good access to the countryside including the Mary Towneley Loop (part of the Pennine Bridleway) and Irwell Sculpture Trail

• Strong local identities and sense of community

• Local heritage icons – Victoria Arcade, Waterfoot library building

• Local cultural and community assets – Horse and Bamboo Theatre

• Outdoor activities such as fishing and water sports at Clowbridge, Clough Bottom and Cowpe reservoirs

Table 4.5 - Issues and Opportunities in Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough


• Amount of vacant and derelict land and buildings – particularly in Rawtenstall

• Weak urban structure threatened by the scale of through routes and an ill defined urban core

• Housing pressures in Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough

• Traffic congestion on the Gyratory and Burnley Road including associated Air Quality problems

• Loss of local services and vitality in Crawshawbooth village

• Lack of car parking provision • Local landscape and wildlife issues in

• Redevelopment of the Valley Centre, New Hall Hey and Rawtenstall bus station

• Potential for a Manchester to Rawtenstall commuter line

• Maximising the role of the East Lancashire Railway as a tourist attraction

• Improving and redeveloping leisure facilities – particularly at Ski Rossendale

• Good access to the countryside, including the Irwell Sculpture and Shoe Trails

• Attractive traditional shopping along Bank Street with a high proportion of local businesses


70

Goodshaw and Loveclough • Poor links between the railway station,

town centre and market

Table 4.6 - Issues and Opportunities in South-West Rossendale Issues Strengths and Opportunities

• Constrained by the Green Belt • Significant development pressures,

which could lead to an erosion of the areas character and appeal

• Access and Infrastructure – much of the area is only accessible by private vehicle, and many of the roads are unadopted and poorly maintained, making some routes difficult to navigate

• Flood Risk – the area has a history of flooding and the Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) illustrates that this is a key issue for much of the area

• Increasing Visitor Traffic – the area is riddled with footpaths, cycle tracks, bridle ways attracting increasing numbers of visitors, adding to the existing pressure on roads and services

• Excellent transport links to Manchester and wider region

• Strong and attractive housing market • Picturesque environment and access to the

countryside including the Irwell Sculpture Trail, Rossendale Way and other Countryside Rights of Ways (CROWs)

• East Lancashire Railway halt in Irwell Vale • Distinct local heritage • Good access from Helmshore to

Haslingden Grane for Ogden Reservoir and Holden Wood

• Amount of suitable brownfield land

Table 4.7 - Issues and Opportunities in Haslingden and Rising Bridge


• Amount of vacant and derelict buildings and land – particularly in Haslingden town centre

• Number of hot food takeaways in Haslingden town centre

• No pedestrianised shopping area/s • No single focal point for community • Development pressures on the

countryside • Lack of housing choice • Tightly-knit urban area – constraining

amount of developable sites • Lack of leisure, cultural and recreation

facilities

• Well linked accessible employment sites – Carrs Industrial estate and Broadway, and the business hub and planned at Rising Bridge.

• Excellent quality bus services – Accrington to Manchester X40 and X41

• Halo Panoptican and increased tourism interest

• Access to the countryside including the Shoe Trail and Kings Highway as well as Haslingden Grane

• Abundance of local history and heritage including several Commemorative Blue Plaques


71

5. Sustainability Appraisal Framework Introduction

5.1 The SA Framework is a key device for completing the SA. It is derived by synthesising the baseline information and sustainability issues into a systematic and easily understood tool that allows the assessment of effects arising from the implementation of the Core Strategy in key areas. Although the SEA Directive does not specifically require the use of Objectives or indicators in the SEA process, they are a recognised and useful way in which social, environmental and economic effects can be evaluated and compared at key stages of the Strategy’s development.

5.2 The SA Framework comprises a list of Objectives. Progress toward achieving these Objectives will be measured using the corresponding indicators. The purpose of the SA Framework is to provide a set of criteria against which the performance of the Core Strategy can be predicted and evaluated.

Sustainability Appraisal Framework 5.3 An SA Framework has been developed using an iterative process, based on the review of

relevant plans and programmes and the analysis of the baseline data and key sustainability issues within the scope of influence of the Core Strategy.

5.4 The SA Framework developed for the Rossendale Core Strategy includes a series of carefully selected indicators and sub-criteria that provide clarification of the intended interpretation of each Objective. The indicators are therefore important in guiding the appraisal process.

5.5 The first SA Framework was set out in the SA Scoping Report 2005, which was then revised in the updated Scoping Report in 2009. The Framework was further refined in the Bespoke Consultation SA Note, May 2010, to ensure that all appropriate sustainability aspects were covered either by the Objectives or sub criteria. The reasoning behind the changes is explained in Appendix E.

5.6 The SA Framework is shown in Table 5.1 with key sustainability objectives, relevant indicators and locally distinctive sub-criteria.


72

Table 5.1 –SA Framework Indicators in Green are those currently reported in the Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) - the LDF Monitoring Framework Indicators in Orange are further indicators that the Council may wish to collect data on to assist with monitoring the performance of the Plan against the SA Framework SA Objective (high level Objective)

Locally Distinctive Sub Criteria Relevant Indicators of note


Protect and enhance features of historical and archaeological importance which contribute to the cultural and tourism offer of the Borough.

Percentage of eligible open spaces managed to green flag award standards

Number of listed buildings in Rossendale

% of sites and monuments at risk.

% of Grade 1 and 2* listed buildings at risk

Number of buildings in conservation areas

Number of planning permissions refused on the basis of design

% of new development meeting BREEAM standards

No. of derelict properties

Number of up to date Conservation Appraisals

Number of refusals due to impact on landscape character/ designation

Proportion of development permitted in the Green Belt

Hedges removed (number of hedge removal notices refused)

Number of environmental stewardship schemes

Development within area of landscape designation

Number of Tree Preservation Orders made

Landscape Character Assessment – identified indicators

‘ANGST’ standards for green space

Ensure that all new development meets high standards in terms of quality of design and relates well to the character of existing development and the public realm.

Protect and enhance high quality landscapes and townscapes in the Borough, especially those that contribute to local distinctiveness. Maximise the use of local materials where feasible and appropriate.

Improve access to high quality public open space, natural green space and the open countryside.


73

SA Objective (high level Objective)



To ensure that new development does not impact upon the condition of sites of biodiversity interest including SSSI and other local and national designations.

Change in priority habitats and change in priority species (by type)25

Change in areas designated for their biodiversity value

Condition of SSSIs (favourable/unfavourable/destroyed (wholly or in part)

No. developments including landscaping schemes to benefit biodiversity

NI197 - improved local biodiversity (proportion of local sites where positive conservation management has been or is being implemented)

Loss of designated habitat

% of land covered by woodland

Biodiversity Action Plan targets

Effect of acidity and nitrogen from air pollution on biodiversity

To protect Natura 2000 sites from the adverse effects of human activity, pollution and climate change.

To promote habitat provision and enhancement within new development and seek to link these to existing habitats.

To ensure that new development does not impact upon the condition of sites of geological interest, including geological SSSI and RIGS.

Condition of geological SSSIs (favourable/unfavourable/destroyed (wholly or in part)


Promote sustainable design and construction measures that reduce water consumption and result in decreased run-off of polluted water (including during construction phase).

Number of planning permissions granted contrary to the advice of the EA on water quality grounds

Length of watercourses of good biological and chemical quality

Daily Domestic Water Use (per capita consumption)

No of applications including Sustainable Drainage Systems

Encourage the allocation and location of new development where water abstraction can occur sustainably.

Ensure efficient use and management of water resources, addressing a potential increase in demand.

25 See NW habitat targets by county to 2015 http://www.biodiversitynw.org.uk/page.asp?id=79


74



Maintain and improve the ecological status of rivers in Rossendale.

Reduce unsustainable agricultural practices, particularly in Nitrate Vulnerable Zones to reduce diffuse pollution or poor quality effluent returns.

Maintain and improve the qualitative status of groundwater in the Borough, particularly the chemical status of groundwater.


Seek to provide a built environment that is appropriate for the predicted changes in the local weather conditions and is resilient to extreme weather events.

Adapting to climate change (NI 188) (built environment)

Number of applications incorporating improvements to green infrastructure network

Change in habitat connectivity Ensure the provision of green infrastructure network that will minimise health impacts associated with climate change as well as enable species to adapt to the changing environment through the connectivity of habitats.


Ensure new development incorporates SUDS where appropriate.

Number of applications including Sustainable Drainage Systems

Number of planning permissions granted contrary to the advice of the EA on flood risk grounds

Number of approvals incorporating EA advice on flood mitigation guidelines

NI189 - flood and coastal risk management

Avoid further development in locations at risk from flooding and mitigate any residual flood risk through appropriate measures including through design.

6. To minimise the requirement for energy use, promote efficient energy use and increase the use of

Promote high sustainable design and construction standards for housing and non-housing development, in order to ensure that Rossendale meets the Government target of all new residential development being zero carbon by 2016 and the relevant targets for non-residential development (e.g. BREEAM standards).

Renewable energy capacity installed by type

Amount of energy produced by renewable energy sources

Provision of renewable energy in new development

% of development meeting Code For Sustainable Homes


75



energy from renewable resources

Clear guidelines and support for the use of renewable energy sources in new and existing developments to increase renewable energy production in the Borough.

standards

CO2 emissions by sector and per capita

Energy efficiency – the average SAP rating of local authority owned dwellings (1 – highly inefficient, 100 – highly efficient) Reduce domestic, industrial and commercial consumption of

gas and electricity.

Maintain trend of lowest emitter of CO2 in Lancashire and seek to further reduce the volume of CO2 emissions.


To protect and enhance soil quality in Rossendale Amount of floorspace by employment type, which is on previously developed land

Percentage of new and converted dwellings on previously developed land

% of development on greenfield sites

(Ha) Contaminated land reclaimed as a) Open Space/Natural Green Space b) Development

% of contaminated land reclaimed in total

% new development on brownfield sites

% of development on protected open space

Density of new residential development

Number of potential contaminated sites.

Develop brownfield sites where these can support wider sustainability Objectives (e.g. reduce travel by car, improve the public realm, avoid loss of biodiversity, gardens, etc.). Re-use vacant buildings.

Ensure new development will not result in contamination of land and promote the remediation and regeneration of the large areas of existing contaminated land.


Reduce the number of journeys made by private car in order to reduce the high levels of nitrogen dioxide in areas of traffic congestion in the Borough, particularly Bacup Road, Rawtenstall and Manchester Road, Haslingden.

Estimated traffic flows for all vehicle types (million vehicle kilometres)

Number of days on which air quality is poor

Noise levels/ tranquillity levels

Consider and mitigate the impacts on air quality that might result from development, including major infrastructure projects.


76



Consider and mitigate noise and light pollution that might result from development, including major infrastructure projects.


Ensure safeguarding of mineral resources and the efficient use of primary natural resources.

Capacity of new waste management facilities by type

Amount of municipal waste arising by management type, and the percentage each management type represents of the waste managed

No. of new developments incorporating recycling facilities

Continue to reduce the proportion of waste that goes to Landfill in the Borough.

Promote the integration of waste management facilities to enable efficient recycling and energy from waste as part of new developments.


Ensure that all new development meets the lifetime homes standards.

Plan period and housing targets

Housing Trajectory

Affordable Housing Completions

Average House Price

House Type and Tenure

Net additional pitches for gypsy and travellers

Housing Quality – Building for Life Assessments

Percentage of new dwellings completed at less than 30 dph, between 30-50 dph and above 50 dph

Average Rentals

% of households rated unfit

No. unfit dwellings demolished

No of people on housing waiting list

Provide supported housing and sheltered housing options in order to meet the needs of an ageing population in the Borough.

Seek to develop flexibility of tenure and housing type in the Borough and balance housing supply by increasing the choice of stock beyond predominantly terraced properties.

Coordinate housing provision with investment in employment and community services to ensure that settlements meet the needs of their communities.

Provide decent, good quality and affordable housing for all.


77



Identify sufficient sites to increase housing supply to meet projected population growth.

% of housing development incorporating community green space / children’s play areas

Income to average house price ratio

11. To improve access to basic goods, services and amenities and equality of opportunity in Rossendale

Provide improved physical access to education, skills and training facilities, health, recreation and leisure facilities, cultural and tourist attractions on foot, cycle and by public transport.

Amount of new residential development within 30 minutes public transport time of a GP, a hospital, a primary school, a secondary school, areas of employment and a major retail centre

Percentage of rural households within set distances (either 4km or 2km) of key services

% of new development located in Key Service Centres and Local Service Centres

Number of households within 30 minutes of key service centres by public transport

Number of planning applications refused on access grounds

The % of the population within 20 minutes travel time of different sports facility types

Quality and length of Public Rights of Way

Improvement in inclusive accessibility to routes, open spaces, sites and facilities and public transport.

Extent of Green Infrastructure network (including walking and cycling routes) within and connecting settlements

Ensure that issues of both rural and urban deprivation are considered in development proposals.

Improve access to healthcare facilities throughout Rossendale.


Promote healthy and active lifestyles through encouraging walking and cycling.

General health

Life expectancy

Crime by type

Amount of new residential development within 30 minutes public transport time of a GP and a hospital


78



Reduce crime, disorder and the fear of crime, by adhering to ‘designing out crime’ principles in all new development.

Doctor/Patient ratio

Length of cycleways created

NI8 - adult participation in sport and active recreation

Number of developments with restriction of opening hours/ noise reduction measures

No Visits to leisure centres

Design Out Crime layouts included in applications

No of developments which meet police crime design awards standard

% Households with 1 or more person with a limiting long term illness

Proportion of developments meeting Natural England Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards (ANGSt)26

Improve life expectancy, health and well-being by improving the provision of amenity green space, play space for children and young people and outdoor sports provision in Rossendale.

13. To improve education, skills and qualifications in the Borough and provide opportunities for

Promote good access to educational and training opportunities for all sectors of the population, particularly amongst deprived communities.

Percentage of Year 11 pupils educated to NVQ levels 2,3 or 4

Percentage of Year 11 pupils achieving 5 or more GCSEs grade A-C

% of the population whose highest qualification is a first degree Promote employment opportunities which more closely match the skills of local people.

26 ANGSt recommends that everyone, wherever they live, should have an accessible natural greenspace:

• of at least 2 hectares in size, no more than 300 metres (5 minutes walk) from home;

• at least one accessible 20 hectare site within two kilometres of home;

• one accessible 100 hectare site within five kilometres of home; and

• one accessible 500 hectare site within ten kilometres of home; plus

• a minimum of one hectare of statutory Local Nature Reserves per thousand population.


79



lifelong learning Seek to attract employment and training programmes specifically targeted at young people in the Borough

(or equivalent)

Number of S106 agreements requiring skills training

% of the population with no or low qualifications Improve the number of residents achieving NVQ3 or NVQ4.


Provide a positive planning framework for developing and exploiting new growth opportunities in tourism, creative and knowledge based industries and leisure and cultural activities.

Amount of floor space developed for employment by type

Employment land available by type

Losses of employment land in (i) employment

Economic Activity Rates

Earnings by residence, workplace

Employment by Industry

GVA per head claimant count

VAT registrations by broad industry group

% of occupations within ‘science and technology professional’ category

Amount of floor space developed for employment by type in employment or regeneration areas

Amount of employment land lost to residential development

Worklessness in Rossendale

Unemployment Annual Population Survey and Claimant Count Rates

Reduce dependency on manufacturing industries and promote development which diversifies the economic base.

Provide support for economic development that reduces out-commuting by developing strategic economic infrastructure and identifying sites for development


80



Identify opportunities for retail development to increase comparison expenditure in the Borough.

.

Average Household Income

Amount of completed retail and office development

ONS Annual Population Survey

Proximity of jobs from residences

Unemployment rate % (male and female)

GVA £ per capita


Encourage the use of the Borough’s natural and cultural features for tourism development, within their environmental limits.

Amount of completed leisure development

Visitor Numbers

Tourism expenditure in the Borough

Additional expenditure in the Borough as a result of the tourism industry

Improve the provision of leisure, tourist and cultural facilities to increase local spend and increase employment opportunities.


Reduce the number of vacant retail properties across the Borough.

Amount of completed retail and office development in town centres and Local Authority Area.

Total amount of floorspace for town centre uses.

Amount of leisure development in town centres.

Vacancy rates within the Town Centres

Footfall within the Town Centres

Retail Hierarchy and ranking

New business start up / closure rate

Improve the quality of the public realm in order to improve the attractiveness of the service centres to new investment.

Improve the provision and quality of bus and rail services in Rossendale to reduce dependence on the private vehicle, especially for journeys to work.

17. To improve the choice and use of sustainable transport in

Develop and maintain safe, efficient and integrated transport networks within Rossendale, with good internal and external links.

Methods of travel to work

Vehicle Ownership


81



Rossendale and reduce the need to travel

Reduce car dependency by providing services and facilities accessible by sustainable modes of transport, particularly in rural areas.

Distance travelled to work

Amount of completed non-residential development complying with local car parking standards


No. of road accidents

% of new development located in Key Service Centres and Local Service Centres

Promote a pattern of development which reduces private vehicle dependency in the location of homes, jobs, and leisure and community services.

Develop strategic transport and communication infrastructure.

Rossendale Borough Council

Sustainability Appraisal of the Core Strategy Publication Version – Main Report

82

Predicted Future Trends 5.7 The starting point for the prediction of future trends is the current condition and trends. The

existing environmental, social and economic baseline and associated current trends for Rossendale Borough is presented in chapter 3 of this report.

5.8 The SEA Directive requires the Environmental Report to include a consideration of the likely evolution of the state of the environment without the implementation of the Plan. There will be a number of external influences that will affect the state of Rossendale’s social, natural, built and economic environment during the lifetime of the LDF. Without the Core Strategy and its associated policies, the saved policies of the Rossendale Borough Council Local Plan would be used when considering development proposals. This approach to considering the likely trends against the SA Objectives without implementation of the LDF has been continued from the Scott Wilson approach in the SA Report on the Proposed Way Forward (November 2009).

5.9 Key local and regional planning documents that will influence the area’s future trends without the implementation of the LDF are set out below. These have also been considered in determining the likely future trends in terms of the state of the environment:

• Rossendale District Local Plan (1995);

• Conservation Area Appraisals and Conservation Area Management Plans (being funded by English Heritage);

• North West Regional Spatial Strategy (2008);

• United Utilities Water Resources Management Plan (2009);

• North West River Basin Management Plan (2009);

• Lancashire Climate Change Strategy (2009-2020);

• Lancashire Minerals and Waste Development Framework (Core Strategy, February 2009);

• Rossendale Council Interim Housing Policy Statement (2008);

• Rossendale Housing Strategy 2005-2008;

• Rossendale Homelessness Strategy 2008-2013;

• Rossendale Community Strategy 2008-2018;

• Rossendale Economic Strategy 2008-2011;

• Lancashire Economic Strategy and Sub-regional Action Plan (2006);

• Lancashire Local Transport Plan (2006-2010); and

• Joint Lancashire Local Transport Plan 2011-2021.

5.10 In addition to local guidance, the national planning policy described in the context review (chapter 3) will ensure that some effects against the SA Objectives will be positive without the influence of the plan. It is not the role of the LDF to repeat national policy, thus where national planning policy provides sufficient and appropriate safeguards to deliver benefits against SA Objectives, this has been referenced in the assessment of the sustainability performance of the LDF.

5.11 The SA Framework (Table 5.1) is the key tool used in the assessment of effects. The prediction of effects, in terms of their magnitude, frequency, duration, and spatial extent, is conducted via detailed analysis of the baseline data. It is thus important to ensure that critical aspects of the baseline can be directly related to the Objectives and indicators of the SA framework.



83

Determining the significance of predicted effects is perhaps the most critical task in the SA. The picture that the baseline presents in terms of the SA framework is the starting point for this.

5.12 Table 5.2 presents a preliminary analysis of the fundamental characteristics of the baseline (current conditions and predicted trends without the LDF) against the SA Objectives using a simple three-point normative scale as follows:

• Current Conditions - good/moderate/poor;

• Future Trends (without plan implementation) - improving/stable/declining.

5.13 Table 5.2 indicates that without the implementation of the LDF, the predicted future trends show a decline in performance against a number of SA Objectives. In particular, without the future policies in Rossendale, the state of the environment and socio-economic conditions in respect of the following are considered likely to experience a declining trend:

• Biodiversity and geodiversity;

• Adapting to climate change;

• Reducing flood risk;

• Meeting the community’s needs in terms of housing;

• Improving access to basic goods, services and amenities;

• Equality of opportunity;

• Supporting a strong, diverse, vibrant and sustainable local economy; and

• Maintaining and enhancing the vitality and viability of town and village centres.


84

Table 5.2 - SA Baseline Condition and Future Trends Summary

No SA Objective Baseline Future Trend

Limitations of Data

Commentary


Good Stable No data limitations known

The various townscapes and landscapes that characterise much of the Borough offer environments that greatly enhance Rossendale’s local distinctiveness. These assets currently face variable pressure from new development. Restrictive covenants imposed by heritage designations and planning controls should ensure that the character of Rossendale is retained. The saved policies within the local plan afford a great deal of protection to existing heritage and landscape features. Without the LDF these policies are likely to be sufficient enough to protect existing sites of heritage and landscape value. However, potential new sites that could be identified over the plan period may require additional protection that is not available in the existing local plan. English Heritage is contributing funding for the preparation of Conservation Area Appraisals and Conservation Area Management Plans for the Borough’s conservation areas. The appraisals and management plans will help ensure that issues present within the conservation areas are identified and a robust evidence base is put into place.


Moderate Declining No data limitations known

The existing local plan policies (from the Rossendale saved local plan) afford a degree of direct protection to key biodiversity sites by way of limiting development outside the urban boundary. However, these will not be sufficient in the medium/long-term to protect these sites from all impacts of development and climate change, especially given the level of new housing development that will be required in Rossendale and the growing tourism/leisure sector. Potential new sites that could be identified over the plan period may require additional protection that is not available in the existing local plan. Analysis of the Borough’s SSSIs reveals that the Lower Red Lees Pasture site is in declining condition- a trend that is likely to continue. Furthermore, the effects of climate change are a particular threat to sites of biodiversity value within the Borough. Without new policies to tackle climate change, the risk to vulnerable habitats may increase further. A series of technical mountain bike trails have been completed in Lee Quarry as part of the Adrenaline Gateway. The increase in leisure activity in this area could lead to increased visitor numbers to the Lee Quarry SSSI and additional vehicle movements. Without the intervention of new policies to mitigate these impacts, the effects could be detrimental. Rossendale’s housing requirement under the North West RSS is for at least 4,000 net additional dwellings over the RSS plan period 2003-2021. Without the plan, the pressure to develop on Greenfield sites and other vacant sites will be increased. This could


85


Limitations of Data

Commentary

potentially lead to a loss in sites of biodiversity value in the Borough and damage important links between habitats. There are seven RIGS located within Rossendale that may also be under threat from new development without the LDF. Without evolving controls on pollution from all sources there is an increased risk that habitats are at risk from contaminants changing the natural environment through airborne, waterborne and soil based pathways.


Moderate Improving No data limitations known

In recent years, the water quality of rivers of Rossendale has improved greatly and some can now support brown trout and diverse aquatic invertebrates. However, although the quality of river water in the North West has improved in recent years, the region does still contain about one third of the poorest quality rivers in England. The policies relevant to water quality and resources contained within the local plan saved policies (2007) would continue to offer protection to watercourses in the Borough. The further development of the North West River Basin Management Plan will also have a positive impact on ensuring that the quality of watercourses within the Borough continues to improve. There is currently no policy to ensure sufficient water utilities are provided alongside new development in the Borough could lead to problems with the water infrastructure. The United Utilities Water Resources Management Plan explains how the company intends to manage water supply and demand across North West England over the next 25 years and identifies some key predicted trends. The plan predicts a reduction in water available for use in the Borough to occur in 2014/15. The plan also indicates that demand for water in the North West region is expected to continue to decrease, despite the anticipated increase in households by over 600,000 by 2034/35 (net of demolitions). Some of the key reasons behind the prediction are: • Growth in customer metering – studies have shown that customers in the North West

will reduce their water use by an average of 8.3% in a normal weather year as a result of being metered, with predicted higher savings in a dry year;

• The increasing use of water efficient appliances; and • Forecast reductions in measured non-household demand resulting from

macroeconomic factors and water efficiency.


86


Limitations of Data

Commentary


Data unknown

Declining Current baseline on adaptation to the effects of climate change unknown.

The Lancashire Climate Change Strategy uses modelling from the UK Climate Impacts Programme27 (UKCIP) to identify potential changes in the weather in Lancashire. The Strategy provides a series of maps that show that under a high emissions scenario, Lancashire will experience the following by 2080: • Annual daily temperature could rise by around 3oC; • Summer precipitation will decrease by around 45%; and • Winter precipitation will increase by around 15%.

The Lancashire Climate Change Strategy (2009-2020) is underpinned by data which identifies the carbon savings needed to achieve 2020 targets in relation to climate change. The strategy identifies four key sectors that have been considered (domestic, transport, business & public sector and land use) and suggest a series of actions that can be taken in the future that will assist in mitigating the impacts of climate change. In terms of mitigating the effects of climate change, the saved policies would have minimal impact as reference is not made within the Local Plan saved policies. The actions suggested as part of the Lancashire Climate Change Strategy (2009-2020) and other national and regional policies will assist in the mitigation of the impacts caused by climate change. However, these will not address locally specific issues that are likely to occur within Rossendale.


Poor Declining No data limitations known

Flood risk is a concern for the Borough. The River Irwell that passes through the Borough poses a risk of flooding in certain areas. Urban locations within the study area that are potentially affected by flooding include parts of Bacup, Haslingden, Rawtenstall and Whitworth. Figure 3.5 shows the flood zones within Rossendale from the SFRA Level 1, including the predicted effect of climate change on flood risk. The Local Plan saved policies make no reference to minimising the potential risk of flooding associated with new development.

27 UKCIP 2002 Scenarios Available at: http://www.ukcip.org.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=156&Itemid=287


87


Limitations of Data

Commentary

6. To minimise the requirement for energy use, promote efficient energy use and increase the use of energy from renewable resources

Poor Stable No data limitations known.

Only 0.006 MW of renewable energy technology was installed and completed in Rossendale in 2007/08. However, permission has been granted for 65.316 MW of renewable energy generation facilities within the Rossendale Borough linked to capitalising on Rossendale’s significant wind resource. The South Pennine Renewable Energy Study (Maslen 2010) identifies wind as the most easily captured renewable energy resource in Rossendale. The baseline trends show that although there is sufficient capacity within the Borough, implementation has been difficult. Notwithstanding this, Scout Moor is the largest onshore wind farm in England. Without the LDF policies to ensure the implementation of renewable energy capacity within Rossendale, this trend of unrealised potential is likely to continue.


Moderate Stable No data limitations known.

In total, Rossendale has 97 hectares of brownfield land. This is the highest amongst the other East Lancashire authorities of Burnley, Hyndburn and Pendle. Each of the Rossendale wards has a proportion of vacant and derelict land and the wards of Worsley and Hareholme have the largest proportions in the Borough. Large areas of contaminated land are located within the Facit and Shawforth ward and in Stacksteads. There are also pockets of contaminated land within Whitwell, Longholme, Hareholme, Cribden, Goodshaw, Worsley, Helmshore and Greenfield. There is a large area of Green Belt land located towards the South East of the Borough, either side of the A671. Another large area of Green Belt that separates Haslingden and Rawtenstall stretches down through the ward of Eden and two smaller areas are located between Waterfoot and Bacup and north of Haslingden. Rossendale’s housing requirement under the North West RSS is for at least 4000 net additional dwellings over the plan period 2003-2021. Without the plan, the pressure to develop on Greenfield sites may be increased. However, national policy states that previously developed land should be prioritised for new development. This requirement should ensure that the large amount of previously developed land in the Borough is utilised ahead of the greenfield sites. The policies in the existing local plan have an impact on protecting land resources.


Good Improving Data gap relating to noise and light pollution

There are no AQMAs in Rossendale. Air pollution is most concentrated in the main urban areas of Haslingden and Rawtenstall. Air quality in Rossendale has improved, with reductions of 30-14% combined air indicator scores in some areas of the Borough. The Borough enjoys better air quality than many other Lancashire areas, particularly the urban areas. The results of the air quality monitoring programme in Rossendale show that, in general, the concentrations of all pollutants being monitored are below Objectives set out in the


88


Limitations of Data

Commentary

NAQS and below values at which adverse health effects are likely to occur. The Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment 2009 indicates that proposals for new developments in the Borough have been considered and no adverse effects on air quality are expected as a result of those developments for which planning permission has been granted. Furthermore, policy DC 1 (Development Criteria) within the Rossendale Local Plan saved policies (2007) would ensure that any new development within the Borough would not have a significant impact on air quality within Rossendale.


Good Improving No data limitations known.

Since the October to December 2006 quarter, the amount of waste collected per head has reduced from 91.11 kg per head to 89.16 kg per head (a decrease of 1.95 kg). Population growth projections for the Borough predict an increase of around 4.4% by 2030. This is likely to lead to an increase in the volume of waste produced in the Borough, which will increase the need to provide suitable facilities to dispose of and recycle waste. The Lancashire Minerals and Waste Development Framework Core Strategy (February 2009) adopted Core Strategy sets out strategic policies for sustainable resource management in the plan area. This should ensure that waste in Rossendale is minimised.


Poor Declining No data limitations known.

There is likely to be an overall undersupply of housing up to 2020/21. There is also a growing issue of insufficient affordable housing in the Borough, as well as a high proportion of stock declared as unfit and/or vacant. Without the implementation of the Core Strategy, the Rossendale Council Interim Housing Policy Statement 2008, the Rossendale Housing Strategy 2005-2008 and the Rossendale Homelessness Strategy 2008-2013 would continue to provide the planning framework for housing. In the short term existing unfavourable housing trends would be likely to continue, including a limited choice of housing options, low demand and low high prices and market failure to the east of the Borough and a growing issue of insufficient affordable housing. The high number of vacant dwellings and the poor condition of some of the housing stock would also be likely to remain. Over time, as the regional and national planning framework changes, the existing planning policy framework would become out of date, and in some instances, irrelevant. The housing needs of the Borough are likely to change both now and in the future,


89


Limitations of Data

Commentary

beyond the scope of those planned for in the Housing Strategy. For example, a projected ageing population in Rossendale will have implications for future supported housing needs and supply of relevant accommodation. Demand for supported housing and services for older people is likely to grow dramatically. Demand for sheltered housing options is also expected to grow over the next few years. There is therefore a need to consider specific measures to address these needs. Furthermore, there is an identified affordable housing need in the Borough. There is a growing need for intermediate housing, as access to mortgages is likely to become as important as price in restricting housing options in the Borough. The population in Rossendale is expected to increase by 11.9% by 2031 and subsequent household growth is expected to be approximately 25%. Rossendale is in an overall position of undersupply up to 2020/21, without the implementation of the Core Strategy and wider LDF the Borough would be unlikely to meet the five-year housing requirement. There is therefore a need to allocate sufficient sites to accommodate this future residential need. The existing planning policy framework for housing would not deliver the required mix, type and size of housing needed. Without the Core Strategy there would be uncertainty about adequate housing provision for all and a greater land-take for larger houses could affect the availability of future land supply. The strategic gap between urban and rural areas could also be lost. There are significant pockets of deprivation in the Borough, characterised by poor housing, low quality employment and limited access to facilities. The gap between the highest deprived areas and the rest is widening, concentrating the problem in the worst affected areas in the Borough. Without the Core Strategy a ‘business as usual approach’ is likely to result in piecemeal development and would result in regeneration opportunities for the Borough being missed. Market-led housing provision would be dictated by the most profitable sites and house types. The implementation of the Core Strategy and the wider LDF is likely to lead to a more joined-up approach to tacking deprivation than the existing planning policy framework. Ultimately, without new housing policies the current planning policy framework is ill-equipped to deal with the future housing needs of the Borough. The Core Strategy sets a more sustainable course of action than the existing planning policy framework. Whilst measures are taken through the wider planning framework such as the Council's Empty Homes Strategy and Housing Strategy, there is a clear need for the delivery of a new


90


Limitations of Data

Commentary

mix, type and size of homes through the planning system. 11. To improve

access to basic goods, services and amenities and equality of opportunity in Rossendale


Hospitals are the least accessible facility in both rural and urban areas in Rossendale according to the Rossendale household survey data (2007)28. Accessibility to bank/building society facilities, leisure facilities and a doctor is also a problem in Rossendale. The Rossendale LDF SA Scoping Report (2009) suggests there is a lack of amenity green space, play spaces for children and young people and outdoor sports provision within Rossendale. There is also a need to upgrade sports facilities to reach an adequate standard. Without the implementation of the Core Strategy, the Saved Policies of the Rossendale Local Plan (2007) would continue to provide the planning framework for the community equality. In the short term existing trends would be likely to continue, including poor accessibility to services and provision of open space / play facilities in certain areas of the Borough. Furthermore new development could put pressure on existing open space in some settlements. Over time, as the regional and national planning framework changes, the saved Local Plan Polices would begin to become out of date, and in some instances, irrelevant. The needs of the Borough are likely to change both now and in the future, beyond the scope of those planned for in the Local Plan. The Rossendale Community Strategy 2008-2018 outlines a number of proposals for a range of projects over the next 5 to 10 years. The Adrenaline Gateway project is likely to lead to increased leisure and cultural facilities available within Rossendale. Rossendale’s population is forecast to grow by around 11.9% up to 2031 steadily over the plan period, with projected growth centred on older people rather than those of a working age. This ageing population could create new needs in terms of physical and social infrastructure and service provision. Without the implementation of the Plan the Council may struggle to align land use planning with infrastructure planning; this could have a negative impact on community health and equality, leisure and education. Without the Core Strategy there may also be less emphasis on addressing spatial disparities in the Borough. With a lack of mechanisms for linking Rossendale’s communities to employment, training or education opportunities in the Borough, through

28 http://www.rossendale.gov.uk/site/downloads/Rossendale%20SHMA%20FINALop.pdf


91


Limitations of Data

Commentary

interventions such as local labour agreements or through encouraging lifelong learning. Ultimately, while there are other Council and partner policies in place that directly influence the implementation of services associated with community health, education and leisure, without the implementation of the Core Strategy, there would be no up-to-date planning policy to guide the location of provision. The absence of an up-to-date planning policy framework would limit the positive impact on sustainability of other council and partner policies because, spatially, there will be no guidance for developing such services.


Poor Stable No data limitations known.

Rossendale is the 6th worst performing authority in terms of health deprivation out of the 14 Lancashire authorities and nearly 8% of the working population is permanently sick or disabled. Moreover, there is a need to reduce health inequalities across the Borough with parts of the Healey and Whitworth and Stacksteads wards performing worst in terms of health deprivation. 20% of lower super output areas (LSOAs) are in the worst 10% in the country. Without the implementation of the Core Strategy, the Saved Policies of the Rossendale Local Plan (2007) would continue to provide the planning framework for community health. In the short term existing trends would be likely to continue. Over time, as the regional and national planning framework changes, the saved Local Plan Polices would begin to become out of date, and in some instances, irrelevant. The Rossendale Community Strategy 2008-2018 outlines a number of proposals for a range of projects to improve health and accessibility to health facilities within the Borough. Additionally, the role of the Local Primary Care Trust is likely to go some way to maintaining health levels over time. The Rossendale Health Campus could lead to improvements in relation to health and life expectancy throughout the Borough. In the absence of the Core Strategy, the existing policies of both the Council and its partners would continue to deliver improvements to quality of life and health in Rossendale. The delivery of the Sustainable Community Strategy, through Local Area Agreements and the Corporate Plan, requires the Council to work with partners to make the necessary quality of life improvements. However, existing trends of worsening health problems may continue unless more significant interventions are made. Potential impacts of a worsening situation for health in Rossendale include reduced life expectancies and the experience of serious health problems by a wider proportion of the population over a longer period of time.

13. To improve education, skills

Moderate Improving No data limitations

The IMD 2007 domain for education deprivation in England places Rossendale as the 150th worst local authority out of 354. This represents a drop of 8 places since 2004.


92


Limitations of Data

Commentary

and qualifications in the Borough and provide opportunities for lifelong learning

known. The percentage of the population within Rossendale that has a qualification at both NVQ1 and NVQ2 is higher than the regional and the Great Britain average. However, the percentage with qualifications at NVQ3 and NVQ4 is below the regional and Great Britain average. Without the implementation of the Core Strategy, the Saved Policies of the Rossendale Local Plan (2007) would continue to provide the planning framework for education. In the short term existing trends would be likely to continue, including low educational attainment. Over time, as the regional and national planning framework changes, the saved Local Plan Polices would begin to become out of date, and in some instances, irrelevant. However, the Local Education Authority, as the key providers of education, may ensure that educational attainment is maintained.



Unemployment within Rossendale is low and the economic activity rate is significantly above the regional and national averages. However, wage rates within the Borough are low and there is a high proportion of out-commuting to neighbouring authorities for work. Without the implementation of the Core Strategy, the Saved Policies of the Rossendale Local Plan (2007), the Rossendale Economic Strategy 2008-2011 and the Lancashire Economic Strategy and Sub-regional Action Plan (2006) would continue to provide the planning framework for the local economy and employment including tourism. In the short term existing unfavourable economic trends would be likely to continue, including employment deprivation and low job density. For example, the trend in VAT registrations has been unfavourable for a decade or more and this trend would continue. Trend forecasts would suggest that unless action is taken to speed up the restructuring of the local economy, employment opportunities will continue to decline in the Borough, leading to a growth in out-commuting. Over time, as the regional and national planning framework changes, the saved Local Plan would begin to become out of date, and in some instances, irrelevant. Likewise, the economic needs of the Borough are likely to change both now and in the future, beyond the scope of those planned for in the Local Plan and the Economic Strategy. There are some future projects that are likely to have a positive impact on the local economy and create employment opportunities. The Rising Bridge project, which is being funded by the NWDA, seeks to transform a vacant brownfield site into a Business and Enterprise Village creating new, high quality business space for small to medium sized enterprises. The project will create nine pavilion-style offices and could accommodate 159 jobs.


93


Limitations of Data

Commentary

Unless changes are made to the local planning framework, opportunities to help forge a more sustainable Borough will be lost. As a consequence of the industrial legacy and small local economy, unemployment and workless households are evident in many parts of the Borough. The gap between the highest deprived areas and the rest is widening, concentrating the problem in the worst affected areas in the Borough. Without the Core Strategy, allowing a market- led development will result in the highest profit margins for the developer and it may result in the Council failing to capture higher skills and the loss of economically active communities, thus not passing the benefits of development onto the people of Rossendale.


Poor Improving No data limitations known.

In terms of Tourism, the STEAM (Scarborough Tourism Economic Activity Monitor) Report for Lancashire 2006 identifies that the tourism sector generates some £65.55m of expenditure in the Borough; this was the lowest amount of expenditure generated by tourism in any district in Lancashire in 2006. Without the implementation of the Core Strategy, the Saved Policies of the Rossendale Local Plan (2007), the Rossendale Economic Strategy 2008-2011 and the Lancashire Economic Strategy and Sub-regional Action Plan (2006) would continue to provide the planning framework for the local economy and employment, including tourism. Adrenaline Gateway is a long-term project to develop Rossendale using an adrenaline concept as the theme. The project aims to create a nationally recognised sport/leisure network throughout East Lancashire, using a hub and spoke approach to provide a new economic platform for tourism and sport. This project is likely to increase visitor numbers in the Borough and subsequent expenditure is likely to have a positive impact on the local economy. The project is likely to provide new jobs and new opportunities for local businesses.



In terms of retail and town centres, without the implementation of the Core Strategy, retail developments may look towards out of town centre locations and may not consider the need for sustainable transport options required to give good access for all. There may be increased pressure on Greenfield land if there is a switch towards out of town retail development. Likewise, the high level of retail vacancies across the Borough would not be addressed.


94


Limitations of Data

Commentary

17. To improve the choice and use of sustainable transport in Rossendale and reduce the need to travel

Poor Improving No data limitations known.

Rossendale has no train stations or active rail lines other than the East Lancashire Railway (which is currently more a tourist attraction than a public transport service) and therefore relies on access by road for longer distance travel be that by private motor vehicle or public buses. Without new policies that promote sustainable transport, improved accessibility and a greater choice in modes of transport, the likely situation going forward in Rossendale will be a further increase in reliance on the private car, commensurate with predicted growth and development projects. This will have an inevitable knock-on effect for congestion (and therefore air quality and the tranquillity of the Borough) and on road safety. However, there are plans to use the East Lancashire Railway as a commuter line at peak times to link Rawtenstall with Ramsbottom, Bury and Heywood for travel to work in those locations and enabling connections with the Bury metrolink for those commuting into Manchester for work. This would hopefully reduce traffic levels somewhat at peak times in the south east of the Borough. In addition, the Lancashire Local Transport Plan (2006-2010) proposes improvements to bus services in Rossendale by identifying Quality Bus Initiatives and improving Rawtenstall Bus Station. The Joint Lancashire Local Transport Plan 2011-2021 will guide the strategic development of transport in the Borough. This will ensure that future effects are positive although local implementation may be constrained without the LDF.



95

6. Compatibility Assessment of Core Strategy Objectives against SA Objectives

Testing the Spatial Vision and Strategic Objectives

6.1 The over-arching Spatial Vision and Strategic Objectives were assessed by Scott Wilson as a first step in assessing the sustainability of the Core Strategy ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Consultation Document.

The Spatial Vision 6.2 The basis, or key aim, of the Core Strategy Spatial Vision lies within the Rossendale Sustainable

Community Strategy 2008-2018, which states that:

“Rossendale will have strong communities with an enhanced environment and heritage. It will be an attractive place to live, where tourists visit and employers invest.”

6.3 This basis is sustainable in that it seeks to improve Rossendale as a borough socially, environmentally and economically, the three pillars of sustainability.

6.4 The Spatial Vision itself adds a spatial dimension to this over-arching aim, identifying where certain aspects contributing to the achievement of the Core Strategy vision should be promoted within the Borough, including:

• Reducing inequality across the Borough;

• Improving Rawtenstall as the main centre for retail and business, supported by public transport improvements;

• Promoting the east of the Borough as a tourist destination for sports and recreation and for its historical and architectural interest;

• Locating most development within existing urban and settlement boundaries;

• Promoting Housing Market Renewal in the east of the Borough; and

• Promoting Rawtenstall, Haslingden, Bacup and Whitworth as priority areas for economic development.

6.5 In relation to the SA Framework, this Spatial Vision was compatible with many aspects of the framework and established a helpful spatial understanding of where the Core Strategy was seeking to direct and promote different types of development. However, the compatibility assessment noted that the Key Diagram supporting this Vision was not especially clear and did not always appear to be consistent with the text of the Spatial Vision.

6.6 The compatibility assessment also indicated that the Spatial Vision focuses on development that will primarily meet social and economic issues, whilst there is comparatively little reference to the need to protect the environment of Rossendale when considering new development. Particular weaknesses identified related to protecting biodiversity, environmental, heritage and landscape assets of the Borough for their own intrinsic value (not just to support tourism or recreation) and tackle climate change in a pro-active manner.



96

6.7 Given that a large amount of national and regional planning policy is given over to protecting such resources and that the majority of Rossendale’s land area is open moorland countryside, the compatibility assessment report identified this as a gap that should be rectified in the Spatial Vision.

The Strategic Objectives 6.8 The Strategic Objectives provide some more depth and measurable targets to the Spatial Vision.

Table 6.2 reproduces the assessment of these Objectives against the SA Framework (originally presented in the SA Report of the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ document). Each Strategic Objective was identified as being consistent with at least one topic area (and therefore SA Objective) and, similarly, each topic area covers at least one Strategic Objective. Consequently, the assessment concluded that, as a whole, the Strategic Objectives addressed the SA Framework.

6.9 However, it is clear from the matrix that several Strategic Objectives were considered to address the social and economic topics such as “Community, Health and Equality, Leisure and Education” and “Local Economy and Employment, including tourism”, whereas only one of the Strategic Objective addressed environmental topics. Furthermore, the Strategic Objective concerned with the environment covered four of the environmental topics – the grouping of several key issues into one Strategic Objective was therefore considered to potentially underplay the importance of achieving environmental benefits through the Plan.

6.10 On the basis of the above, the compatibility assessment process culminated in a recommendation that the Spatial Vision and the Core Strategy may benefit from including a Strategic Objective(s) that seeks specifically to protect and enhance environmental assets and improve the environment and open countryside. The recommendations also stressed that such an Objective should be phrased to reflect the intrinsic value of the environment and countryside and therefore avoid making connections to the need for environmental protection arising out of a desire for social or economic benefit.

Final Vision and Spatial Objectives 6.11 Following the assessment and recommendations of the Core Strategy Vision and Strategic

Objectives, the Core Strategy DPD (Publication Version) includes a revised vision and spatial objectives. These are shown in Table 6.1. As can be seen, the vision now includes the need to protect the intrinsic value of the natural environmental assets of the Borough. An additional strategic objective seeks to enable adaptation to the effects of climate change.

Table 6.1 – Core Strategy Publication Version Vision and Strategic Objectives

Core Strategy: Spatial Vision

Rossendale is defined by its Pennine moorland countryside and small stone built towns and villages located along the valley floors and will continue to be so. By 2026, we aim to reduce inequalities across the Borough by strengthening opportunities in the East of Rossendale and fulfilling the potential of the West of the Borough. Rawtenstall and its surrounding communities will be the central focus of the Borough. The Valley Centre will be redeveloped and will act as a regeneration catalyst for the rest of the town centre; incorporating additional and increased choice of shopping, retail and office facilities, well linked to a new bus interchange and Rawtenstall train station. Rossendale’s distinctive landscapes and natural assets will continue to be protected and enhanced for both their intrinsic value to biodiversity and their recreational and economic value to local people and tourists alike. The east of Rossendale including Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Whitworth will continue to develop as tourist destinations for sport and recreational activities as well as an area of historical and architectural interest.



97

Most development including housing and affordable housing will take place within the urban boundaries of the main settlements, capitalising on the move towards a low-carbon economy and supporting sustainable lifestyles. Particular emphasis will be placed on realising the objectives of the existing Housing Market Renewal programme and any subsequent initiatives in the east. Rawtenstall together with Haslingden, Bacup and Whitworth will remain priority areas for economic development including employment and office space.

Core Strategy: Strategic Objectives

SO1. To maintain the extent of local transport provision and access to services throughout Rossendale; with particular emphasis on restoring and improving the condition of the network , and expanding links to and from Greater Manchester and other areas; along with reducing perceptions of parochialism between Rawtenstall and Bacup and encouraging sustainable modes of transport.

SO2. Meet the housing needs of the current and future population(s) in relation to amount, types, size, location, quality and price and actively support initiatives and proposals in the east which would assist in achieving the objectives of the Elevate HMR pathfinder or future programme.

SO3. To create the opportunities for people to achieve their aspirations and maximise health and mental well-being, training, skills provision, and education, particularly in the east of the Borough where educational attainment and worklessness is an acute issue.

SO4. To promote high quality design, enhance and improve Rossendale’s built heritage and maximise its potential value as a catalyst for regeneration and further investment in the Borough, especially in Bacup town centre and designated conservation areas.

SO5. Encourage and support local businesses and inward investment, entrepreneurship and new sectors of the economy to grow, whilst ensuring that critical infrastructure including sites and buildings suitable for supporting employment and wealth generation are retained, with a focus on bringing redundant previously developed land back into sustainable uses.

SO6. Promote Rawtenstall as the main town centre for Rossendale with particular focus on regenerating the Valley Centre. Bacup, Haslingden and other local centres and parades should serve the needs of the local population/catchment emphasising the role of local businesses and local identities.

SO7. Identification, protection, enhancement and management of Rossendale’s natural environment and landscapes, maximising their potential to support sustainable tourism, recreation and leisure provision, whilst accommodating renewable energy in an appropriate and sensitive manner. Schemes and proposals supporting the Adrenaline Gateway project will be actively encouraged, especially where they will link into other forms of tourism and recreation attractions, particularly in the east around Lee Quarry.

S08. To mitigate and adapt to climate change in particular through ensuring that new development is delivered in sustainable locations; reducing the carbon footprint of new and existing building stock; protecting and enhancing the Borough’s Green Infrastructure and promoting sustainable transport.


98

Table 6.2 – Assessing the Core Strategy Objectives against the SA framework (extract from SA Report, 2009 (Scott Wilson))



5094442/FINAL SA 10 11 15 Main Report Rossendale CS SA Publication Nov 2010

99

Formatted: Font color: CustomColor(RGB(57,74,88)), Do not check spelling orgrammar

Deleted: FINAL SA 10 11 15 Main Report Rossendale CS SA Publication FINAL with tracks


Deleted: 10.09.13 Main Report Rossendale CS SA Publication FINAL JD

7. Assessment of Strategic Options and Preferred Policies (November 2009)

Introduction 7.1 The SEA Directive requires that the Environmental Report should consider ‘reasonable

alternatives taking into account the Objectives and the geographical scope of the plan or programme’ and give ‘an outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with’ (Article 5.1 and Annex Ih). Stage B of the SA/SEA process seeks to develop and refine options for the Core Strategy.

7.2 The Strategic Options for the Core Strategy were incorporated into the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy DPD. Within this document, each preferred option was selected out of two or more options for each policy area. The options not taken forward were referred to as “alternatives”. Therefore, the SA Report for the Core Strategy ‘Proposed Way Forward’ documented the assessment of the sustainability of the alternatives.

7.3 The following sections outline the assessment of the Strategic Options (or ‘Alternatives’), which were assessed in comparison to the Preferred Policies (the process is described in section 2). It should also be noted that the SA Report produced in 2009 (by Scott Wilson) that accompanied the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy Preferred Options (November 2009) was consulted upon. The results of this consultation and how the responses have been addressed in subsequent assessments (see chapter 9 onwards) are provided in Appendix E.

Preferred Options Screening and Assessment Screening

7.4 Table 7.1 lists the Preferred Policies assessed by Scott Wilson as part of the SA Report to accompany the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward (November 2009). These policies were subject to a screening exercise, as detailed in section 2 of this report. Table 7.2 summarises the results of this process, setting out which topics each policy in the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward was deemed to have “significant”, “less significant” and “little or no” effect upon. It should be noted that this was not an assessment of whether the effects were positive or negative, but purely a consideration of the likely significance of any effect of a policy on a given topic.

7.5 As can be seen from Table 7.2, the Area Vision Policies tended to affect most topics in some way or another, especially the social and economic topics, as they cover a range of development issues for a given location. However, the Topic Policies tended to only affect those topics that are directly relevant to the subject of the policy. The matrix also implies that most of the Topic Policies were focused on issues that affect social and economic aspects of sustainability, with very few focusing on environmental issues. Those that did focus on environmental issues appeared quite general in nature, compared to the quite specific Topic Policies covering various aspects of the social and economic-related issues.



5094442/FINAL SA 10 11 15 Main Report Rossendale CS SA Publication Nov 2010

100





Table 7.1 - Summary List of Preferred Options in ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy document

Policy Number

Policy Title

AVP 1 Strategy for Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth

AVP 2 Strategy for Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir

AVP 3 Strategy for Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water

AVP 4 Strategy for Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough

AVP 5 Strategy for South-West Rossendale

AVP 6 Strategy for Haslingden and Rising Bridge

RLDF 1 General Development Locations

RLDF 2 Meeting Rossendale’s Housing Requirements

RLDF 3 Distribution of Additional Housing

RLDF 4 Affordable and Supported Housing

RLDF 5 Meeting the Needs of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

RLDF 6 Training and Skills

RLDF 7 Social Infrastructure

RLDF 8 Transport

RLDF 9 Accessibility

RLDF 10 Employment Land Provision

RLDF 11 Retail and other Town Centre Uses

RLDF 12 The Valley Centre

RLDF 13 Protecting Key Local Retail and other Services

RLDF 14 Tourism

RLDF 15 Overnight Visitor Accommodation

RLDF 16 Preserving and Enhancing Rossendale’s Built Environment

RLDF 17 Preserving and Enhancing Rossendale’s Natural Environment

RLDF 18 Renewable Energy

RLDF 19 Wind Energy

RLDF 20 Planning Obligations (Section 106 agreements)

RLDF 21 Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) with Planning Obligations

RLDF 22 Planning Application Considerations


5094442/FINAL SA 10 11 15 Main Report Rossendale CS SA Publication Nov 2010 101





Table 7.2 – Summary of SA results by Topic (Scott Wilson 2009)


102

Detailed Assessment and Recommendations 7.6 The screening exercise allowed the subsequent topic chapter assessments to focus on those

policies that actually affect the topic in their “whole-plan” assessment. These are shown in detail in Appendix D. The summaries of the detailed assessments by topic are shown in Table 7.3 to Table 7.12. The key for interpretation of the colours used in these tables is included in chapter 2 of this report.

7.7 Recommendations for mitigation and enhancement of the predicted effects of the policies are included in Appendix D. These recommendations have been taken into account where appropriate in the revision of the Core Strategy. The revised policies have since been reassessed in two iterations, as outlined in chapters 9 and 10 of this report.

Table 7.3 – Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna

Type of Impact Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward Core Strategy plus other plans, programmes, etc.

Short / medium term (to about 2026)

The Preferred Core Policy options identified within the Core Strategy generally strive to meet the sustainability Objective identified in the SA framework on the topic of Biodiversity, Fauna and Flora. Policies RLDF 17 and RLDF 22 will have a positive effect on ensuring that sites of biodiversity value within the Borough are protected and enhanced. However, a number of other policies would benefit from a stronger reference to the need to the theme of biodiversity. Consequently, careful wording of more specific policies suggested above could minimise the significant negative effects identified as well as ensuring that there is adequate provision for the protection of the environment resulting in a positive effect on biodiversity, fauna and flora in Rossendale. The alternative options assessment shows that the majority of the policies perform better/equally. However, AVPs 4, 5 and 6 have alternative options that propose no growth, which would have a positive impact. RLDF 18 also has an alternative which would provide improved protection for habitats in Rossendale.

Other plans and programmes that promote growth will have similar negative effects on biodiversity however very positive effects are created by the implementation of other locally strategic plans and programmes such as the National Planning Policy described earlier.

Long term (beyond 2026)

Biodiversity flora and fauna can be affected by a combination of environmental considerations such as air pollution and climate change therefore it is difficult to predict the impact of the Core Strategy. Although the delivery of the Core Strategy policy options would result in a continuing positive effect on biodiversity, fauna and flora in Rossendale if all mitigation identified is delivered.

As above

Areas likely to be significantly affected

Healey Dell LNR will be conserved and enhanced through sensitive additional developments within the Borough as part of policy AVP 6.

Permanent vs. Temporary

There may be instances of habitat loss due to new development that will inevitably be permanent.

Secondary or indirect Aside from the direct effects that new development can have on biodiversity, the

effects it has on other factors such as transportation, air quality, water quality, land resources, climate change and community facilities such as open space can all have secondary or indirect effects on biodiversity, through impacts on their habitats, or on


103


wildlife corridors or on specific species.

In relation to the effects of the proposed policies within the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward, most of the above factors that result in secondary effects on biodiversity are addressed to a degree, but in many cases policy wording could be stronger to limit the effects of new development on those factors and therefore indirectly on biodiversity.

Table 7.4 – Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Land Resources



A significant focus of the plan is on the use of previously developed land and vacant and derelict buildings and the need to bring these back into use. However, many of the policies within the plan do not specifically mention the need to protect key land resources within the Borough alongside delivering new development. However, these negative effects can be mitigated by the inclusion of additional policy content that aim to ensure key land resources within the Borough are protected as part of new development proposals. The alternative options for growth looked at as part of AVP 1, 4 and 6 would have a more positive impact on ensuring that land resources are used sustainably. However, they do not perform as well as the preferred policy options.

Other plans and programmes that promote growth will have a negative effect on land resources. However, very positive effects will be created through the implementation of the Waste Strategy for England and the Geodiversity Action Plan for Lancashire.


In the longer term, the location of growth will require innovative thinking, as the portfolio of previously developed land gets increasingly smaller due to redevelopment, pressure on Greenfield and Green Belt sites will increase.

Targets set out within the waste strategy and designations within the landscape strategy are likely to change as more land becomes developed within Rossendale. It is likely that the sub-region will be left with a core of previously developed land that is not economically viable to remediate. At this point Greenfield land will be the only options.


The areas in and around the locations identified within the area vision policies are most likely to be impacted by the Core Strategy preferred options as this is where the majority of previously developed land is located. These areas will be affected positively.


As the development of land is considered a permanent arrangement, both the positive and negative effects will be permanent.

Secondary There are no significant secondary or indirect effects on land resources in the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward, other than the relationship of increased development (especially residential development) could have with land resources if the waste produced by those new developments is not minimised, re-used or recycled. If waste management is not addressed sufficiently (which the Core Strategy


104


Proposed Way Forward does not) there is the possibility of a greater proportion of waste ending up in landfill, which can have a very negative effect on land resources.

Table 7.5 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Water Quality and Resources



A number of policies within the Core Strategy set a strong direction to ensure that water quality and resources are protected in Rossendale. RLDF 17 will ensure that water quality is maintained and protected and RLDF 22 will ensure that sufficient water utilities are provided as part of new development. RLDF 18 will also help to ensure that renewable energy developments will not have a detrimental impact on the water quality in the Borough. The negative effects identified above can be minimised or in some instances removed through the effective implementation of other preferred Core Policy options and through making the suggested changes within specific policies. The alternative options for growth looked at as part of AVP 4, 5 and 6 would have a more positive impact on ensuring that water quality and resources are maintained than the preferred policy options. However, they do not perform as well as the preferred policy options as they would not help to promote suitable development in key locations in Rossendale.

The Core Strategy builds upon the regional plans, including the Draft North West River Basin District – River Basin Management Plan; and the Regional Spatial Strategy that should together deliver the improvements required by the Water Framework Directive and help to conserve water resources.


In the longer term, should sufficient growth have been achieved, there will be a need for continual monitoring and mitigation of water quality and resource issues.

An emphasis on water quality and resource management will continue to be prevalent in all documents. It is necessary for Rossendale to maintain a long term commitment to promoting water efficiency in all new developments.


If suggested changes are made within the Core Strategy, then the qualities of watercourses located throughout the Borough are likely to be ensured.


If water consumption increases unchecked then the impact on the natural environment is likely to be permanent.

Secondary Effects (positive or negative) will generally emerge over the medium / long-term as the effects of new development gradually effect water quality and water resources as levels build-up / reduce. Such effects should be considered permanent in that, without removing development, such trends will continue indefinitely. Any negative effects on water quality caused by construction (most likely through surface water run-off) will only be temporary however.


105

Table 7.6 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Air Quality

Type of Impact

Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward Core Strategy plus other plans, programmes, etc.


The policies set out in the Core Strategy Preferred Options are likely to have a positive impact in the short/ medium term. Although growth proposed within the Core Strategy may have a negative impact on air quality, measures within other policies (including the sustainable location of development, promotion of public transport and renewable energy schemes) would help to address this. If the mitigation measures are implemented in relation to policy RLDF 22 (Planning Application Considerations), then this will ensure that the need to protect air quality in Rossendale is taken into consideration for all future developments. The alternative options for growth looked at as part of AVP 4, 5 and 6 would have a more positive impact on ensuring that air quality is maintained than the preferred policy options. In addition, alternative options for RLDF 8 and 18 also perform better than the preferred policy in terms of ensuring good air quality in Rossendale.

Overall, plans and activities dealing with air quality issues, along with the Core Strategy, should ensure that sustainability in terms of air quality should not be negatively affected.


In the longer term, should sufficient growth have been achieved, there will be a need for continual monitoring and mitigation of air quality issues. If suggested mitigation measures are adopted in the Core Strategy, it should support the monitoring and mitigation of air quality issues.

Emerging plans, programmes and strategies, including likely continuation of air quality management at local level, would be extremely likely to effectively continue the emphasis on protecting air quality.


Air quality is not a major problem within Rosendale. However, the main urban areas in the Borough and settlements close to the main transport routes are most likely to be significantly affected by air quality issues.


The positive state of air quality within the Borough should represent a permanent trend. However, there is scope for air quality to worsen suddenly, perhaps due to a new development affecting a local area negatively. Therefore, it will be important to ensure that there is a continual focus on ensuring high air quality and is unpolluted, particularly in and near to residential areas, community facilities and town centres.

Secondary The main secondary / indirect effect on air quality is where proposals / policies could lead to an increase in traffic levels, especially congestion. This, in turn, will lead to reduced air quality. The Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward seeks to limit the impact on air quality from increased traffic, predominantly by reducing traffic levels and congestion. However, some policies may need to be clearer or stronger on what is required from developments in relation to traffic and congestion to ensure this.

The development of renewable energy technology could have a secondary positive effect on air quality, as it provides a sustainable form of energy production. This would improve air quality in Rossendale.


106

Table 7.7 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Climatic Factors and Flooding



The preferred options will have a positive impact in terms of locating development in sustainable locations, ensuring public transport is promoted, enhancing the green infrastructure network and promoting the development of renewable energy schemes. In terms of the impacts of flooding, the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward will have a positive impact in all areas of Rossendale if the alterations suggested above are implemented. The alternative options for growth looked at as part of AVP 2, 5 and 6 would have a more positive impact on ensuring that climatic factors are addressed than the preferred policy options. In addition, alternative options for RLDF 8 and 18 also perform better than the preferred policy in terms of providing alternative forms of development to reduce the impacts of climate change.

Other plans and strategies at all spatial levels in the UK will strengthen the impact of the preferred policies and emphasise the importance of this topic area


In the long term the preferred options relating to climatic factors and flooding may have less of an impact as new guidance and legislation is introduced. However, by ensuring that new development in Rossendale is directed towards the most sustainable locations in terms of access to public transport and key services, there is likely to be a positive impact on the Borough.

Over the long term national and regional legislation and guidance may emerge which will strengthen the targets for carbon emissions reductions and will ensure that environments are adaptable. This may outdate the Core Strategy policies.


All areas in Rossendale are likely to benefit from the combined impacts of the preferred policies. The areas where future growth and development is anticipated in the Borough will also be particularly affected.


The majority of impacts relating to climatic factors and flooding will be permanent, especially in terms of reducing carbon emissions; ensuring developments are adaptable to climatic shifts and locating development away from flood risk.

Secondary Aside from the direct effects that new development can have on climatic factors and flooding, any negative effects in relation to air quality and transportation may have indirect effects. A reduction in air quality or an increase in travel (especially by car) throughout Rossendale could make the local effects of climate change even worse.


107

Table 7.8 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Heritage and Landscape

Type of Impact



The Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward consider the wider context and setting for the development of Rossendale. The impact of the Core Strategy upon heritage and landscape have been fully considered. If all of the mitigation measures set out above are carried out, then the policies will protect and enhance key heritage and landscape features present within the Borough. Policies RLDF 16 and 17 are particularly important in relation to the heritage and landscape topic area. The alternative options assessment shows that the majority of the policies perform better/equally. However, AVPs 4, 5 and 6 have alternative options that would ensure that key heritage and landscape assets are protected. RLDF 18 also has an alternative which would provide improved protection for key landscapes in Rossendale.

There is expected to be a positive impact from the combination of the Core Strategy and other plans and programmes on heritage and landscape.


The importance of protecting, enhancing and managing places, landscapes and assets of heritage value is well recognised and these features will be well managed into the longer term.

Emerging plans, programmes and strategies recognise the value of proactive management of key features.


The impact of this policy will be borough-wide. Areas that include important heritage assets (e.g. listed buildings and conservation areas), areas of Green Belt and areas of high landscape value are likely to be the most significantly affected by the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward.


Changes to the heritage and landscape of the Borough are likely to be permanent.

Secondary Development in the vicinity of areas of heritage and landscape value could have negative secondary effects through the indirect effects caused by additional traffic / congestion and air quality. Furthermore, any negative effect in climatic factors and flooding may pose an increased risk to heritage and landscape assets within Rossendale.


108

Table 7.9 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Community Health and Equality, Leisure and Education

Type of Impact



The Preferred Core Policy options identified within the Core Strategy strive to meet the sustainability Objectives identified in the SA framework on the topic of Community Health and Equality, Leisure and Education. Overall the policies proposed should have an overall positive impact on community health and equality, leisure and education in the Borough. Although alternative polices AVP6 and RDF20 promote the reinforcement of existing services and facilities in the Haslingden and Rising Bridge and subsidise further improvements (including leisure and community improvements) and also promote the expansion of services and facilities in rural areas of the Borough, it is felt that preferred options are generally more sustainable in relation to overall sustainability.

The role of the Primary Care Trust, National Health Service and other agencies, and their plans, will be particularly important in ensuring that the preferred options have the desired effect of addressing localised health issues. The implementation of the Building Schools for the Future Programme will also be important in ensuring adequate access to education and improving educational attainment in the Borough. Furthermore other plans, programmes and strategies which relate to improving equality, education and leisure in the Borough will strengthen the positive impacts of the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward on this topic area.


The positive effects seen in the short / medium term should continue in the long term, especially in terms of increased levels of access to services and facilities. There may be a need for planning policy to change its emphasis in the future due to these successes, or there may be new problems arising which will need addressing more explicitly, such as the impacts of an increasing ageing population. The Core Strategy should seek to be as adaptable and as flexible as possible to deal with such changes.

National Health Service activities will continue to be important to supporting health improvements. In the long term the Core Strategy will need to ensure that it is in accordance and continues to support other policy, guidance and plans especially in terms of national and regional guidance which may strengthen the link between social inclusion and spatial planning.


All parts of the Borough will benefit from improved access to a range of services and facilities and from the safeguarding and enhancement of services, community and infrastructure provision including healthcare.


109

Table 7.10 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Local Economy and Employment, including Tourism

Type of Impact



The Preferred Core Policy options identified within the Core Strategy strive to meet the sustainability Objectives identified in the SA framework on the topic of local economy and employment including tourism. Overall the policies proposed should have an overall positive impact on local economy and employment including tourism in the Borough. For example, in the short to medium term the number of people economically active across the city will rise. Although alternative polices AVP3 and 6 promote more concentrated employment and economic growth in the Borough it is felt that preferred options are generally

The implementation of the ELEVATE, Rossendale Economic and Rossendale Community Strategies will also be important in ensuring economic growth and employment opportunities. Furthermore other plans, programmes and strategies which relate to local economy and employment including tourism in the


Facilities to improve health may be permanent but improving health is dependent on lifestyle choices in some cases and hence subject to change. New health problems may emerge, and the Core Strategy should seek to be as adaptable and as flexible as possible to deal with such changes. Ensuring Rossendale’s communities can sustainably access community services and facilities including health, green infrastructure, education and training should have a permanent positive impact for social inclusiveness in Rossendale. There will be other spatial planning issues in relation to community health and equality, leisure and education that will evolve over the lifetime of the Core Strategy and beyond which will mean that some affects become temporary. This includes changing economic and social conditions and circumstances.

Secondary The community health and equality, leisure and education topic is interrelated to all the other sustainability topic areas identified within this report. Other areas of sustainability are explicitly linked to community health and equality, including those relating to the physical environment (air quality, housing provision, open space, transport) and to the social environment (employment and local economy) and as such, these can have a number of secondary impacts on community health and equality, leisure and education. For example, the provision of affordable and supported housing can increase social integration through mixed communities and can have secondary positive impacts on health and quality of life.

Likewise, the provision of sustainable travel options can have secondary impacts on community health and equality, leisure and education, through the improvement of local air quality and the promotion of walking and cycling, which can bring health benefits alongside increasing equality and reducing social exclusion through increased accessibility to service and facilities.

In addition, the design and layout of development can have secondary impacts on community health and well-being. Adopting principles to protect the amenity of existing areas and to create attractive places that are accessible and safe, can have positive secondary impacts on the quality of life for residents through reducing the fear of crime and reducing opportunities for crime in the local environment and by ensuring development can be used by all sections of the community.


110

Type of Impact


more sustainable in relation to overall sustainability.

Borough will strengthen the positive impacts of the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward on this topic area.


The positive effects seen in the short / medium term should continue in the long term, especially in terms of access to employment opportunities and increased economic activity in the Borough. Like all economic growth, the affects are likely to be temporary. However, the conditions needed to stimulate economic growth have much more permanent effects such as good infrastructure. There may be a need for planning policy to change its emphasis in the future due to these successes, or economic conditions could change and these may need addressing more explicitly. The Core Strategy should seek to be as adaptable and as flexible as possible to deal with such changes.

The long term outlook is positive with all strategies aligned towards the similar outcomes.


All parts of the Borough will benefit from economic growth, regeneration and the provision of a wide range of employment opportunities.


The Core Strategy sets the long term vision and strategic Objectives for spatial planning in the Borough. The implementation of the Core Strategy policies in relation to local economy and employment including tourism will have a permanent impact, for example the development of a town centre of the development of employment land is considered permanent. Likewise, the development of employment and other commercial development on previously developed land will help to encourage urban renaissance and is likely to have a permanent impact. The success of the Borough's economy is tied to that of the UK economy as a whole, and as such, there will be other spatial planning issues in relation to the local economy and employment including tourism that will evolve over the lifetime of the Core Strategy and beyond which will mean that some affects become temporary. This includes changing economic and social conditions and circumstances.

Secondary The local economy and employment including tourism topic is interrelated to all the other sustainability topic areas identified within this report. Other areas of sustainability are explicitly linked to economic growth and employment, including those relating to the physical environment (air quality, housing provision, open space, transport) and to the social environment (community health and equality, education and skills, and leisure) and as such, these can have a number of secondary impacts on the local economy and employment. For example, the availability of land resources can have significant secondary impacts on the local economy and employment as the reuse and redevelopment of derelict, vacant and underused land in preference to greenfield sites can help to tackle physical and environmental decay, which in the long term can help stimulate economic activity. Similarly, the quality of the built and physical environment can have secondary impacts


111

Type of Impact


on the local economy and employment; a high quality environment can attract and help stimulate investment. The provision of both social and physical infrastructure can also have secondary impacts on the local economy and employment. If suitable physical infrastructure is in place, such as employment sites and transport connections, this can stimulate and meet the needs of employment growth. Likewise, in terms of social infrastructure education and skill levels can have significant secondary impacts on the local economy, as level of skills can influence the number of new business start ups in an area and a high skill level can encourage higher income jobs to be created.

Table 7.11 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Transportation


Short / medium term (to 2026)

The Preferred Options identified within the Core Strategy generally strive to meet SA Objective 17 and will have a positive effect over the lifetime of the Plan. When compared to the alternative options the preferred options are generally more sustainable in relation to transportation, although some alternatives do raise questions about the need to directly address transportation issues in more detail with regard to certain types of development and development in certain locations. There are negative effects noted, especially in relation to how the amount of new development will affect the transport network and how developers will be held accountable for the impacts their developments will have on the transport network, and these effects could be especially negative in the short-term should the developments come forward before those improvements to the transport network outlined in the Preferred Options. Consequently, there is a need for the Preferred Options to provide greater clarity on transport improvement proposals and link them to areas of new development and provide stronger wording in relation to requiring developers to ensure that their developments are accessible to sustainable transport and do not place an increased burden on the transport network without mitigating for this.

The Lancashire Local Transport Plan (2006-2010) is the key transport plan covering Rossendale and many of the proposals for improvements to the transport network in the Preferred Options are consistent with proposals in the LTP. The LTP also provides further guidance on how Authorities should address transport-related issues such as congestion, which provides some background to the more general statements of intent on transport improvements within the Preferred Options. Future iterations of the LTP should provide a similar role.


In the long-term, the Preferred Options’ effects on the sustainability of transportation will still be positive, but less so. This is because the specific improvements proposed will have been delivered and meeting the increased demand of the new development delivered as part of the Core Strategy but there will be new demands from new developments, possibly in different locations, emerging that no specific proposals will have

The LTP should continue to be updated and will provide background to development decisions in the Borough and will identify further specific transport improvements in the future and therefore will


112


been established to address. The more general policy wording in the Preferred Options that requires developments to be more sustainable in relation to transportation or require developers to mitigate for the negative effects they have on the transport network will continue to have positive effects, but it these type of requirements that could be improved and made stronger in the current wording of the Preferred Options.

consolidate the positive long-term effect of the Preferred Options.


Areas likely to be significantly affected by the Preferred Options are the main towns of Rawtenstall, Haslingden and Bacup, as well as the smaller centres such as Waterfoot and Whitworth to a lesser degree.


Most of the impacts will be permanent as new development will inevitably be permanent, as will many physical improvements to the transport network. However, there will be a temporary variation in effects as the Plan is implemented in either a positive or negative way, depending on whether new development or transport proposals are implemented first.

Secondary Effects on other sustainability factors and issues do not generally have indirect, secondary effects on transportation, although there is the potential for adverse effects on climate change issues to affect transportation indirectly in the long-term.

Table 7.12 - Summary of Predicted Effects of Preferred Option on Housing

Type of Impact



The Preferred Core Policy options identified within the Core Strategy strive to meet the sustainability Objectives identified in the SA framework on the topic of housing. Overall the policies proposed should have an overall positive impact on housing in the Borough. Although alternative polices AVP3 and 5 and RLDF20 promote more housing growth in the Borough it is felt that preferred options are generally more sustainable in relation to overall sustainability.

The Core Strategy should result in an increase to the supply of housing (including affordable housing) within the Borough, whilst also creating mixed and balanced communities.

The implementation of the ELEVATE, Rossendale Homelessness and Rossendale Community Strategies will also be important in ensuring economic growth and employment opportunities. Furthermore other plans, programmes and strategies which relate to housing in the Borough will strengthen the positive impacts of the Core Strategy Preferred Options on this topic area.


The positive effects seen in the short / medium term should continue in the long term, especially in terms of meeting existing and proposed housing needs in the Borough.

The policies allow for sufficient growth in, and design aspects of, the housing stock to


113

Type of Impact


The Core Strategy policies are based on a robust evidence base and have been developed to respond to local needs in the Borough. However, there may be a need for housing policies to change its emphasis in the future due to changes in the socio-economic makeup of the Borough. The Core Strategy should seek to be as adaptable and as flexible as possible to deal with such changes.

accommodate future changes in the population.


All parts of the Borough will benefit from increased housing quantity, location, quality, affordability and choice.


The Core Strategy sets the long term vision and strategic Objectives for spatial planning in the Borough. The implementation of the Core Strategy policies in relation to housing will have a permanent impact.

Secondary The housing topic is interrelated to many other sustainability topic areas identified within this report. Other areas of sustainability are explicitly linked to housing, include those relating to the physical environment (employment provision, open space, transport) and to the social environment (community health and equality, local economy, education and skills, and leisure) and as such, these can have a number of secondary impacts on housing. For example, a diverse local economy can have positive secondary impacts on housing choice and can support housing growth through the attraction of potential residents and investors.

Assessment of Strategic Options 7.8 The “Alternative” options considered in relation to each of the policies in the ‘Proposed Way

Forward’ Core Strategy document that were screened as having a “significant” or “less significant” effect on each SA Objective were appraised in comparison to the Preferred Option. The details of this assessment are shown in Appendix D and summarised below.

Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna What would the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.9 Table 7.1 shows the policies’ numbering as per the ‘Proposed Way Forward’ Core Strategy document referenced in this Section. In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable as their alternative options in relation to biodiversity, flora and fauna:

• AVP 1-3

• RLDF 1, 2, 14, 17, 19, 20 and 21

7.10 A few preferred policies, however, had a more negative effect on the sustainability of biodiversity, flora and fauna than their alternatives. These were:


114

• AVP 4 – an alternative promoted a policy where no growth would take place within Crawshawbooth, Loveclough and Goodshaw. This would ensure that there would be no impact on key biodiversity, flora and fauna features in this area. This is more positive than the preferred policy option, but it should be recognised that this alternative does not have a positive impact in terms of delivering growth to boost the local economy and provide additional community facilities.

• AVP 5 – an alternative identified a no change/ do nothing scenario for South West Rossendale. This would ensure that there would be impact on key biodiversity, flora and fauna sites in the area due to the absence of development. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within South West Rossendale.

• AVP 6 – an alternative option for this policy promoted a no growth scenario for Haslingden and Rising Bridge. This would ensure that there would be no impact on key biodiversity, flora and fauna sites in the area due to the absence of development. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within Haslingden and Rising Bridge.

• RLDF 18 – an alternative to this policy promoted an emphasis on landscape and habitat protection as part of renewable energy proposals within the Borough. This would have a significant positive impact on protecting key habitats in the Borough, but the alternative does not perform as well as the preferred policy in relation to the majority of the other SA topics.

Land Resources What would the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.11 In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to land resources (SA Objectives 7 and 9 (land quality and natural resources)) than their alternative options:

• AVP 2, 3 and 5

• RLDF 1, 2, 3, 10, 14, 17, 19, 20, 21, and 22

7.12 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a more negative effect on the sustainability of water quality and resources than their alternatives. These were:

• AVP 1: an alternative option proposed minimal development within Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth. This alternative would help to preserve Greenfield land and proposed that any development that does come forward would be on PDL, which demonstrates sustainable use of land resources. However, the alternative would not ensure that economic growth or key services and facilities would be delivered within the area.

• AVP 4: an alternative option did not propose any growth within Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough. This would help to preserve Greenfield land within the area, but would not help to deliver growth within the area. This meant that the alternative performed poorly on other SA topics where the preferred policy performed well.

• AVP 6: an alternative option set out a medium growth scenario; specifically seeking to accommodate new development on Brownfield Sites. This demonstrates sustainable use of land resources within Haslingden and Rising Bridge. However, the alternative does not perform as well against the majority of other SA topics in comparison to the preferred policy option.

• RLDF 18: an alternative option emphasised habitat and landscape protection in relation to renewable energy. This emphasis would have a positive impact on protecting landscapes


115

as part of renewable energy development. However, the alternative did not perform well against the majority of other SA topics in comparison to the preferred policy option.

Water Quality and Resources What would the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.13 The “Alternative” options predicted in relation to each of the policies, to have a “significant” or “less significant” effect on SA Objectives 3 (water) were appraised. A comparison of the performance against the preferred option is presented in Appendix D. In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to water quality and resources than their alternative options:

• AVP 1, 2 and 3

• RLDF 1, 2, 17, 18, 21, and 22

7.14 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a more negative effect on the sustainability of water quality and resources than their alternatives. These were:

• AVP 4 – an alternative promoted a policy where no growth would take place within Crawshawbooth, Loveclough and Goodshaw. This would ensure that water quality and resources are maintained in this area. This is more positive than the preferred policy option but it should be recognised that this alternative does not have a positive impact in terms of delivering growth to boost the local economy and provide additional community facilities.

• AVP 5 – an alternative identified a no change/ do nothing scenario for South West Rossendale. This would ensure that water quality and resources are maintained in this area. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within South West Rossendale.

• AVP 6 – an alternative option for this policy promoted a no growth scenario for Haslingden and Rising Bridge. This would ensure that water quality and resources are maintained in this area due to no new development. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within Haslingden and Rising Bridge.

Air Quality What would the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.15 In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to air quality (SA Objective 8) than their alternative options:

• AVP 1 and 2

• RLDF 1, 2, 3, 7, 9, 10, 18, 19 and 22

7.16 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a greater negative effect on air quality than their alternatives. These were:

• AVP 4 – an alternative promoted a policy where no growth would take place within Crawshawbooth, Loveclough and Goodshaw. This would ensure that air quality is maintained in this area. This is more positive than the preferred policy option but it should be recognised that this alternative has a negative impact in terms of delivering growth to boost the local economy and provide additional community facilities.

• AVP 5 – an alternative identified a no change/ do nothing scenario for South West Rossendale. This would ensure that air quality is maintained in this area. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within South West Rossendale.


116

• AVP 6 – an alternative option for this policy promoted a no growth scenario for Haslingden and Rising Bridge. This would ensure that air quality is maintained in this area due to no new development. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within Haslingden and Rising Bridge.

• RLDF 8 – an alternative for this policy was to specify locations for the bus station and Park and Ride facilities in more detail. This approach would be likely to ensure that there is certainty with regards to public transport delivery. This would have a positive impact on encouraging people to use public transport, which will consequently ensure good air quality. Overall, this alternative did perform better than the preferred policy option.

• RLDF 18 – an alternative to the preferred policy was to set more ambitious targets for renewable energy within Rossendale. This would ensure that more renewable energy developments are encouraged within Rossendale than in the preferred policy. In turn, this would have a positive impact on air quality due to the additional sustainable forms of energy production encouraged. It should be noted that the alternative did not have a positive impact on other SA topics (including biodiversity, land resources and water quality), whereas the preferred policy option does.

Climatic Factors and Flooding What would the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.17 In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to climatic factors and flooding (SA Objectives 4, 5 and 6 (climate change adaptation, flood risk and energy use)) than their alternative options:

• AVP 1 and 4

• RLDF 1, 2, 8, 17, 19, 20 and 22

7.18 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a more negative effect on the sustainability of climatic factors and flooding than their alternatives. These were:

• AVP 2 – an alternative promoted a policy where Bacup would act as an eco-town. This alternative would deliver improvements to transport, which would have an indirect positive impact on tackling climatic factors. Well designed environmentally friendly buildings as part of this alternative would have a further positive impact. The alternative performed similarly to the preferred policy on the majority of other topics.

• AVP 5 – an alternative identified a no change/ do nothing scenario for South West Rossendale. This would ensure that there would be no additional impacts in terms of climate change and flood risk in this area. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within South West Rossendale.

• AVP 6 – an alternative option for this policy promoted a no growth scenario for Haslingden and Rising Bridge. This would ensure that there would be no additional impacts in terms of climate change and flood risk in this area. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within Haslingden and Rising Bridge.

• RLDF 8 – an alternative for this policy was to specify in more detailed locations for the bus station and Park and Ride facilities. Specific detail on locations for bus station and park and ride facilities is likely to ensure that there is certainty with regards to public transport delivery. This would have a positive impact on encouraging people to use public transport, which would consequently ensure that impacts on the climate are reduced. Overall, this alternative did perform better than the preferred policy option.


117

• RLDF 18 – an alternative to the preferred policy was to set more ambitious targets for renewable energy within Rossendale. This would ensure that more renewable energy developments are encouraged within Rossendale than in the preferred policy. In turn, this would have a positive impact on reducing the impacts of climate change in Rossendale. It should be noted that the alternative did not have a positive impact on other SA topics (including biodiversity, land resources and water quality), whereas the preferred policy option did.

Heritage and Landscape What would the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.19 In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to heritage and landscape (SA Objective 1) than their alternative options:

• AVP 1 and 2

• RLDF 1, 2, 10, 11, 12, 14, 16, 17, 19. 20 and 22

7.20 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a more negative effect on the sustainability of heritage and landscape than their alternatives. These were:

• AVP 4 – all of the alternatives to the preferred policy would ensure that the heritage and natural environment of the area would be protected. The preferred policy does not set out any provisions to preserve the landscape of the area. It should be noted that the preferred policy would ensure sufficient growth in the area, whereas the alternatives would not.

• AVP 5 – an alternative identified a no change/ do nothing scenario for South West Rossendale. This would ensure that there would be no additional impacts on heritage and landscape features in the area. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within South West Rossendale.

• AVP 6 – an alternative option for this policy promoted a no growth scenario for Haslingden and Rising Bridge. This would ensure that there would be no additional impacts on heritage and landscape features in the area. However, the alternative would not help to deliver growth within Haslingden and Rising Bridge.

• RLDF 18 – an alternative to this policy promoted an emphasis on landscape and habitat protection as part of renewable energy proposals within the Borough. This would have a significant positive impact on protecting key landscapes in the Borough as part of renewable energy schemes, but the alternative does not perform as well as the preferred policy in relation to the majority of the other SA topics.

Community Health and Equality, Leisure and Education What would the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.21 In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to community health and equality, leisure and education (SA Objectives 11, 12 and 13 (accessibility, health, education and skills)) than their alternative options:

• AVP 1-5

• RLDF 1-14,17, 21-22

7.22 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a more negative effect on the sustainability of community health and equality, leisure and education than their alternatives. These were:


118

• AVP6 – Alternative 1 sought to reinforce existing services and facilities in the Haslingden and Rising Bridge and subsidise further improvements (including leisure and community improvements). This would likely have a positive impact on the community health and equality including access to services. However, it should be recognised that this alternative would not necessarily be more positive in relation to other issues within sustainability.

• RLDF20- Alternative 2 would result in high levels of growth and an expansion of rural areas in the Borough which would help to ensure that community facilities are provided in rural areas of Rossendale. However, it should be recognised that this alternative would not necessarily be more positive in relation to other issues within sustainability.

Local Economy and Employment, including Tourism What will the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.23 In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to local economy and employment including tourism (SA Objectives 14, 15 and 16 (local economy, tourism and town and village centres)) than their alternative options:

• AVP 1, 2, 4, 5

• RLDF 1-3, 5-15,18, 20-22

7.24 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a more negative effect on the sustainability of the local economy and employment including tourism than their alternatives. These were:

• AVP3- Alternative 1 would result in major employment and retail development in Waterfoot, Cowpre, Lumb and Water, however it was felt that this approach would not be as positive in terms of overall sustainability as the preferred option.

• AVP6- Alternative 1 would result in major employment and retail development in Haslingden and Rising Bridge but it was felt this approach would not be as positive in terms of overall sustainability as the preferred option.

Transportation What will the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.25 In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to transportation (SA Objective 17 (transport)) than their alternative options:

• AVP2, 4-6

• RLDF1-3, 5, 7–13, 21-22, RLDF20

7.26 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a more negative effect on the sustainability of transportation than their alternatives. These were:

• AVP3 – two alternatives promoted major growth in the Waterfoot area and, purely in transport terms, this was more positive in its effects due to the development of improved transport infrastructure to support the major growth. However, it should be recognised that such alternatives would not necessarily be more positive in relation to other issues within sustainability and would require significant levels of investment to deliver the required improved infrastructure.

• AVP1 – an alternative to this promoted a policy whereby tourism development would still be promoted in the Whitworth and surrounding area but that associated development


119

would be encouraged, including improvements to transport and accessibility. This is clearly more positive in relation to transportation but might have other negative effects on other factors within sustainability and would involve increased levels of investment.

• RLDF14 – one alternative in relation to a tourism policy for the Borough would have a more positive effect on the sustainability of transportation but would involve the discontinuation of the Adrenaline Gateway project. This alternative would have significant negative effects on other sustainability factors, against which the benefits to transportation must be weighed. As such, the preferred option was appropriate but raised the issue of the need to address more directly the transportation issues that tourism development would bring.

Housing What will the situation be under the Core Strategy alternative options?

7.27 In summary, the following preferred policies were generally more sustainable or equally sustainable in relation to housing (SA Objective 10) than their alternative options:

• AVP 1,,2,34 and 6

• RLDF 1-5, 10, 12, 21-22

7.28 A few preferred policies, however, were predicted to have a more negative effect on the sustainability of housing than their alternatives. These were:

• AVP3 – Alternative 1 promoted major housing growth in the Waterfoot area and, purely in housing terms, this was more positive in its effects due to the increase in housing density and choice within the area. However, it should be recognised that this alternative would not necessarily be more positive in relation to other issues within sustainability.

• AVP5- Alternative 4 would increase residential development in South West Rossendale, which will have a significant positive impact on providing housing choice, but it was felt that revised Green Belt boundaries would have a significant negative impact on sustainability in the Borough.

7.29 RLDF20- Alternative 2 would result in high levels of growth promoted which would help to provide housing choice in the Borough, however it was felt that actively promoting the development or expansion of rural communities to become self-sufficient would have not necessarily be more positive in relation to other issues within sustainability.


120

8. Assessment of Publication Core Strategy Policies (September 2010)

8.1 Following the consultation on the Core Strategy Proposed Way Forward in 2009, further revisions have been made to the Core Strategy policies to reflect the following:

• Comments arising from the consultation;

• New evidence that became available in terms of baseline data; and

• The SA recommendations.

8.2 The revised policies have emerged through two subsequent iterations – the first set of policies were consulted upon in May 2010 as part of the Bespoke Consultation process (reported in section 8); and the second set were produced in June 2010. This final iteration, dated September 2010, represents the complete coverage of policies incorporated into the Publication Version of the Rossendale Core Strategy.

8.3 This section presents the results of the appraisal of the updated policies that supersede the previous appraisals. This appraisal builds upon the assessment work for the Core Strategy Bespoke Consultation document and the July 2010 assessments.

8.4 The Core Strategy (Publication Version) sets out 30 policies, 6 of which are area vision policies, and 24 of which are topic-based. To enable the SA process, the topic-based policies were grouped by theme, based on similar aims and Objectives, into components for assessment. In total, there were 19 components for assessment, of which 13 were topic based. The remaining 6 components comprised the area-based strategies (policies) for the delivery of development within the Borough. Although the policies were assessed simultaneously, key features and recommendations have been made for individual policies where necessary. The components used for the assessment are shown in Table 7.1.

8.5 The results of the detailed appraisal of the potential effects predicted to arise against the SA Framework (see Table 5.1) as a result of the implementation of the Core Strategy policies are included in Appendix H. The section below presents an analysis of the results of the detailed appraisal in terms of the significance of direct and indirect effects and recommendations for improving the sustainability of the policies. Suggestions for mitigation of adverse effects or enhancement of positive ones are also set out.

8.6 Table 8.1 presents a summary of the significance of direct effects from the detailed appraisal. The significance of effects is denoted using the following system of symbols:

+++ Strongly positive ++ Moderately positive + Slightly positive 0 No effect - Slightly negative -- Moderately negative --- Strongly negative

+/- Combination of positive and negative effects / neutral effect

8.7 For the purposes of analysing the results of the assessment, significant effects are those which result in moderately or strongly positive or negative effects.

8.8 It should be emphasised that the information quality, and attendant uncertainties and assumptions required to address them, vary across the evidence base for the SA Objectives.

Deleted: Table 8.1

Deleted: Table 8.1


121

This has been systematically recorded and taken into account in the detailed appraisal sheets (see Appendix H). Thus, where a major effect has been predicted for a particular SA Objective, but the evidence base for this contains uncertainties or its interpretation is based on a number of assumptions, the measure of information quality recorded in the appraisal has been reduced, and this is reflected in the calculation of the effect significance (see Section 2 for further details of the appraisal methodology).


122

Table 8.1 – Core Strategy Policy Assessment Components

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

1. Strategy for Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth

• AVP 1: Strategy for Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth

AVP 1: Strategy for Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth “AVP 1: Strategy for Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth The vision for Whitworth will be achieved through the following: Environmental Protection and Development • The area’s key landscape, land and geological resources, heritage, ecological assets, water courses (water quality) and leisure

offer, (e.g. the leisure centre, open moorland, Cowm Reservoir, River Spodden and Healey Dell) will be conserved and enhanced. Current Greenbelt and urban boundaries will be maintained.

• Proposals supporting recreation pursuits will be encouraged including access, connections and improvements to long distance routes, such as the Pennine Bridleway, Whitworth cycleway and other routes linking the settlements to recreational opportunities (e.g. to the mountain bike trails at Lee Quarry). Proposals which support the Adrenaline Gateway, and provide tourism and leisure opportunities (for people of all ages) will be encouraged. Supporting development such as cafés, parking and small scale overnight accommodation will be encouraged in appropriate locations.

Town Centre • The centre of Whitworth will be consolidated (as discussed in Policy 11: Retail and Other Town Centre Uses) which will serve the

local community and attract some small scale additional shops, and other local facilities. Housing and Employment Sites • Under-used and vacant land and buildings, particularly mill buildings and complexes (e.g. Facit, Albert and Orama mills), will be

actively supported for alternative uses - preferably mixed-use, where they are no longer viable for their existing use. The remediation of contaminated land for further redevelopment will also be actively supported.

• Most new residential, employment and office developments will take place as part of the redevelopment of existing employment sites which are proven to be no longer economically viable.

Access to Services and Transport Infrastructure • Access to key services will be improved through the enhancement of existing pedestrian and cycle routes, in addition to high

quality public transport provision - creating safe, convenient and sustainable transport options between peoples home, work and key services.

Selected Supporting Text Vision: “To promote Whitworth as a prime location of choice to live and work, capitalising on the area’s assets and facilities, and ensuring that Whitworth’s leisure and tourism potential is sensitively realised to support the tourism offer available in the east of Rossendale.” Indicators:


123

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

1. Number of vacant business premises 2. Number of overnight visitor accommodation places 3. Improvements in public transport provision and cycle facilities

2. Strategy for Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir

• AVP 2: Strategy for Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir

• Policy 6: Training and Skills (information relating to specific initiatives)

AVP 2: Strategy for Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir “The vision for Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir will be achieved through the following: Heritage and Sense of Place

• The distinct local heritage and sense of place of the area will be conserved and enhanced, particularly through the Bacup Regeneration Initiative.

• Further policies for this area will be developed through the Local Development Framework. This will build on the area’s distinct sense of place, available regeneration opportunities, and promote Bacup’s vitality and viability. It will also seek to strengthen links within the town and to nearby settlements and key attractions and the open countryside.

Housing • Limited residential development on infill sites in Weir and Britannia will be supported where they contribute to the aims of the

HMR area or any future programmes. • Larger housing schemes will be accommodated in Stacksteads and Bacup where they contribute to the aims of the HMR area

or any future programmes. Access

• Pedestrian and cycle connections throughout the area and to visitor attractions such as the Adrenaline Gateway, Lee Quarry, the Irwell Sculpture Trail and the wider countryside will be improved and enhanced (particularly along the old railway lines).

• Improvements to public transport provision and accessibility to and from the area will be prioritised. • Town centre parking in Bacup and at key visitor locations will be provided and improved.

Employment, Retail and Tourism • Proposals for tourism and leisure related developments as well as farm diversification which generate local employment

opportunities will be considered favourably. • Retail development which does not affect the vitality and viability of any centre will be supported, where they would generate

local training and / or employment opportunities. • Newline and Suttons industrial estates will be safeguarded for employment uses, while Futures Park will be promoted as a

location for education and skills development with provision for some small scale office development in combination with facilities supporting the tourism visitor economy.”

Selected Supporting Text Vision: “Bacup will be the hub of the Valley’s emerging tourism industry, building on its rich built and natural heritage supported by complimentary developments and opportunities within Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir. The area’s distinct sense of place is to be retained and enhanced, with vacant sites and buildings to be occupied and open spaces retained. Local people will have a variety of employment and residential opportunities to choose from, supported by appropriate training and educational facilities.”


124

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Indicators 1. Number of jobs created in tourism 2. Skills levels of local people 3. Number of visitors 4. Number applications approved contrary to advice from RBC conservation section or English Heritage. Policy 6: Training and Skills The enhancement of educational and training facilities including plans for a facility for 14-21year olds in the Bacup area will be actively supported.

3. Strategy for Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water

• AVP 3: Strategy for Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water

AVP 3: Strategy for Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water “To achieve the vision for Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water, the Council will: Town Centre and Regeneration

• Consolidate Waterfoot promoting it as a local centre for small businesses and independent shops, incorporating public space provision through a small square or other public focal point.

• Actively encourage the re-use of derelict/underused sites and buildings (in particular the Victoria Arcade) and develop a strategy to assemble brownfield land for development.

Community Facilities and Leisure • Provide additional Leisure and Recreation provision within the smaller settlements combined with promoting activities in the

rural communities and; within or adjoining the main urban area identify suitable sites for tourism development to support the Adrenaline Gateway.

• Enable community facilities such as schools, health, youth and community centres limited expansion to provide improved services and to identify and promote sites to enable community focal points to be delivered.

• Improve bus stops, shelters and interchanges. Access to the Countryside

• Identify and promote sites which encourage access to the outdoors and leisure opportunities across the sub area and provide ancillary visitor accommodation such as car parks, toilets and camping facilities.

• Improve access (including signage) to the countryside and local tourist and leisure attractions. Additional growth for the leisure and tourism sectors within the area will be targeted where appropriate to some of the existing Greenland areas (Local Plan Saved Policy: E1)

Housing and Employment Sites • Identify and allocate appropriate sites for new housing development in the Waterfoot area including affordable housing-

providing a housing mix encouraging families and young people to stay in the Borough. • Protect and promote the existing industrial sites predominantly to the south of the A681 but also north of Waterfoot centre


125

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

which are able to take advantage of good public transport links. Selected Supporting Text Vision: “Waterfoot will have a distinct and vibrant local town centre acting as a small retail niche supporting local businesses. The area will support the wider tourism and leisure opportunities and facilities within Rossendale with appropriately located facilities and services. This will in turn be supported by improved access to the countryside. The majority of previously-developed sites and buildings will have been developed for functional and sustainable uses, contributing to the atmosphere and community spirit of the area. Some additional employment and housing development will act to support the local economy and provide people with a choice of employment and residential opportunities.” Indicators 1. Number of vacant derelict sites and buildings in Waterfoot 2. Number of small business start-ups based in Waterfoot 3. Number of well maintained, clearly marked rights of way into the countryside, linked to existing footpaths and bridleways.

4. Strategy for Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough

• AVP 4: Strategy for Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough

• RLDF 12: The Valley Centre, Rawtenstall

• Part of RLDF8: Transport proposals including Rawtenstall-

AVP 4: Strategy for Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough “The vision for Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough will be achieved through the following: Town Centre

• An SPD/Masterplan will be produced to guide the overall planning of Rawtenstall Town Centre • The redevelopment of the Valley Centre will be encouraged as a mixed use project that will complement its Conservation Area

setting, enhance Rawtenstall’s townscape and provide accessible, attractive new streets and spaces for all users, particularly pedestrians

• Pedestrian links to Rawtenstall Railway Station from the town centre will be made direct and attractive. Station facilities, including parking, will be enhanced to a standard suitable for commuter use.

• The diversity of small shops in Rawtenstall will be retained and enhanced and the potential of the market maximised. Accessibility and Community Facilities

• Rawtenstall Bus Station will be rebuilt to provide high quality passenger facilities and a landmark new development in the town centre.

• New developments will be located in proximity to, and well linked to public transport and Green Infrastructure networks to maximise the potential usage of sustainable modes of travel.

• New bridleway and cycling routes will be created in Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough in particular along Limey Water

• Parking in Crawshawbooth Village Centre will be enhanced. • The rejevunation of Marl Pits Leisure Centre and Ski Rossendale will be undertaken to maximise leisure opportunities for all


126

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Manchester Railway link

sections of the community. Heritage

• Rawtenstall, Goodshawfold and Lovecloughfold Conservation areas will be protected from inappropriate development; and opportunities will be taken for enhancement. Consideration will be given to creation of a Conservation Area in Crawshawbooth.

Environmental Protection • The natural environment will be protected and enhanced in line with policies RLDF17 and RLDF18. The River Irwell and Limey

Water will also be protected from inappropriate developments and enhanced where possible. Housing and Employment Land

• Housing will be focussed on the Rawtenstall area with no new major Greenfield development in Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough.

• Open land to the west of Burnley Road north of Crawshawbooth will be protected from development • New Hall Hey will be safeguarded for bulky goods retail and business use. An extension for business use of land to the south

of Hardman’s Mill will be favourably considered subject to flood risk issues being fully addressed • Consideration will be given for mixed-use development including market and supported housing within the current built up area

of the Rossendale Hospital Site. Proposals for this site will be assessed in accordance with policy RLDF1 (General Development Locations and Principles).“

Policy 8: Transport proposals including Rawtenstall-Manchester Railway link (selected part relating to Rawtenstall): “…Buses Working in conjunction with key partners the following measures will be pursued to enhance the road based public transport network:

• Development of a new bus station in Rawtenstall town centre • Bus Park and Ride facilities in Rawtenstall…”

Selected Supporting Text Vision: “Rawtenstall will be a place where people will want to live, visit and shop. The Valley Centre and its environs will be a revitalised heart for the town complemented by high quality small shops and services on Bank Street and a thriving market. A new commuter rail link to Manchester, attractive walking routes from the station to the town centre and a new bus facility will all contribute to better transport links. New Hall Hey will be developed as a high quality retail and office location. Housing will be focussed on Rawtenstall with no new major Greenfield development in Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough. The integrity of existing open spaces will be maintained. The Village Centre of Crawshawbooth will continue to offer a range of local services served by enhanced parking facilities. Walking and


127

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

cycling improvements in Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough will offer improved countryside access with land to the west of Burnley Road protected from development” Indicators 1. Redevelopment of the Valley Centre 2. Construction of a new Bus Station including high quality links to Rail Station 3. Completion of a) New Hall Hey development and b) related land to south 4. Amount of new housing development in Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough Policy 12: The Valley Centre, Rawtenstall “It is proposed that the regeneration of the Valley Centre will be achieved as follows: The regeneration of the Valley Centre and adjacent buildings in Rawtenstall is of strategic importance. A high quality masterplan-led design approach is being developed and will include the following elements:

• A focal point for retailers with supporting other uses appropriate to a town centre, including office, leisure and civic uses • Examination of the potential for a relocated bus station • Design which responds to the existing townscape in concept, layout and design detailing and enhances Rawtenstall’s urban

grain • Street masterplanning and design which provides active frontages • A mix of uses that encourages natural surveillance and a safe street environment

Housing may also be appropriate and all designs should take into account public transport access, parking provision and public open space provision.” Selected Supporting Text The Valley Centre is a vacant 1960’s shopping arcade that is currently semi-derelict and presents a negative image of the centre of Rawtenstall and the Borough as a whole. It is the Council’s top redevelopment priority reflecting strong public concern about the appearance of the structure. Rawtenstall, the only centre identified as a town centre within Rossendale, has a strong convenience goods offer and a good selection of independent shops. The Retail and Town Centre Study (2009) notes an absence of multiple retailers and suggests that the Valley Centre is a prime site that would be complementary to existing shops on Bank Street for improving the town’s overall retail offer and attractiveness. It is envisaged that the redeveloped Valley Centre will incorporate a range of uses including retail, a strong civic presence, leisure and possibly residential. Indicators 1. Amount of public space provided in any redevelopment scheme.


128

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

2. Percentage of (a) retail; (b) office; (c) civic uses in any redevelopment scheme. 3. Ratio of car parking spaces provided per unit in any redevelopment scheme.

5. Strategy for South-West Rossendale

• AVP 5: Strategy for South-West Rossendale

AVP 5: Strategy for South-West Rossendale “The vision for South West Rossendale will be achieved through the following: Environmental Protection

• Existing Green Belt and urban boundaries will be maintained. • Careful consideration will be given to local flood risk issues in the consideration of all new development, especially in areas of

high risk such as Irwell Vale and Lumb and Ewood Bridge. Heritage

• There will be conservation and enhancement of the distinct local heritage, especially in the conservation areas of Irwell Vale and Lumb, Chatterton and Strongstry.

Tourism and Leisure • Outdoor recreation will be promoted such as:

o Irwell Sculpture Trail o East Lancashire Railway including the halt in Irwell Vale o River Irwell o Haslingden Grane and reservoirs o Other countryside rights of ways

supported by appropriately located small scale accommodation, local shops, cafés and other necessary facilities including limited parking provision.

Transport • Land in the vicinity of Ewood Bridge will be investigated as a possible “Park and Ride” site to support the Manchester to

Rawtenstall commuter line. • Increased and improved management of the local infrastructure and transport provision will be actively promoted.

Housing Development • Limited residential development on previously developed land and infill sites (between built up areas and developments) in

Edenfield, Ewood Bridge and Stubbins will be supported, and affordable housing needs will be met. • Larger housing and employment schemes in suitable locations and where possible on previously developed land, will be

accommodated in Helmshore; supported by improvements to local community facilities and infrastructure.” Selected Supporting Text Vision: “Individual settlements within the area will have grown and developed into better linked and sustainable communities, whilst enhancing their rural character and intrinsic qualities. The area will support the wider tourism and leisure opportunities within Rossendale with appropriately located facilities and services. This will in turn be supported by improved access to the countryside, retention of existing Green Belt boundaries and the conservation of local heritage.


129

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

The majority of previously-developed sites and buildings will have been developed for functional and sustainable uses, contributing to the atmosphere and community spirit of the area. Some additional employment and housing development will act to support the local economy and provide local people with a choice of employment and residential opportunities.” Indicators 1. Amount, type and location of approved development 2. Improvements to existing infrastructure and/or new provision 3. Amount and type of visitor attractions and facilities 4. Number of applications approved contrary to Environment Agency advice on flooding and water quality grounds

6. Strategy for Haslingden and Rising Bridge

• AVP 6: Strategy for Haslingden and Rising Bridge

AVP 6: Strategy for Haslingden and Rising Bridge “The vision for Haslingden and Rising Bridge will be achieved through the following: Housing and Employment Sites

• New residential development will be primarily located on previously developed land and reflect local requirements for affordable housing.

• Economic development will continue to be focused on the Carrs and Broadway industrial estates and will be safeguarded for office and light industry, general industry and storage and distribution (B1, B2 and B8) and the Business Hub at Rising Bridge will be safeguarded for office (B1) uses. Access by bus and cycle will be enhanced.

Heritage • A Conservation Area will be designated for the town centre area

Town Centre • A vacant buildings strategy will be developed and implemented for Haslingden town centre. • Deardengate, Haslingden will be enhanced by the following measures:

o Improvements to the market o Improvements to public space o Pavement widening using materials appropriate to the Conservation Area o Traffic management measures including cycle facilities and parking provision o The Primary Shopping Area (PSA) will be promoted for A1 and A2 uses o A focus on enhancing shop fronts including a consistent approach to design of shutters

Further analysis of this centre and its potential future status will be addressed through the Allocations DPD. Tourism and Leisure

• Tourism proposals (including accommodation) will be supported through measures such as improved signage and public access to attractions such as the Halo Panoptican and Haslingden Grane.

• Haslingden Leisure Centre will be further developed as a community sports and leisure facility for the western part of the Borough.”

Selected Supporting Text


130

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Vision: “Haslingden and Rising Bridge will be attractive places to live and work for all sections of the community. New housing and employment development will be encouraged within the urban boundary and should be primarily on previously developed land. In the countryside improved access and management will help to contribute to resident’s enjoyment of the area. Haslingden Town Centre will be rejuvenated with reduced numbers of vacancies and a broad range of shops. Deardengate will be made more attractive for users including improved public space works.” Indicators 1. Amount of vacant retail units in Haslingden Town Centre 2. Implementation of a Public Realm Strategy 3. Completion of phased programme of improvements at Haslingden Leisure Centre

7. Sustainable Development Principles

• Policy 1: General Development Locations and Principles

• Policy 24: Planning Application Considerations

Policy 1: General Development Locations and Principles “The Council will seek to maintain Rossendale’s distinctive environment of Valley bottom towns surrounded by high hills through implementing the following approach: General Development Locations The greatest amount of new development should take place in Rawtenstall with the majority of other development taking place in Bacup and Haslingden. Urban Boundary Development within Rossendale should take place within the defined urban boundary (Local Plan Saved Policy DS1) unless it has to be located in the countryside and should be of a size and nature appropriate to the size and role of the settlement. The urban boundary defined in Local Plan Saved Policy DS1 will be reviewed and where necessary amended in the Site Allocations DPD in accordance with the following criteria:

• Recent development dictates a necessary change to the boundary • Anomalies and inconsistencies indicate that amendments need to be made • An extension/amendment to the urban boundary would not adversely affect aspects of the natural environment such as

biological, geological, geomorphological, green infrastructure and landscape character assets and including habitats of importance for nature conservation

• Any amendment/extension would not result in the amalgamation of settlements • The amendment/extension would not result in a significant impact on local views and viewpoints

Green Belt & Countryside


131

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Proposals outside the urban boundary will be determined in accordance with the relevant national, regional and local planning guidance.

• It is proposed that the existing Rossendale Hospital site, Haslingden Road is defined as a Major Developed Site in the Green Belt. Detailed boundaries and development criteria will be included in the Site Allocations DPD. The existing building footprint will form the starting point for consideration of any proposal.

Should a review of the existing Green Belt boundaries (Local Plan Saved Policy DS3) be appropriate, this will be done through the Site Allocations DPD This will reflect criteria set out in national and regional guidance and will in particular take into account: Affect on openness, in particular the significance of local and longer distance views into the site The overall integrity of the Green Belt Whether small scale selective rounding off of Green Belt boundaries would assist in creation of sustainable development opportunities Overall Development Approach The Council will seek to enhance the quality and sustainability of places and individual developments by taking into account the following criteria when preparing LDF documents and considering individual planning applications:

• Make best use of under-used, vacant and derelict land and buildings • Complement and enhance the surrounding area(s) of the development through the use of inclusive design and locally

distinctive materials which enhances the character and heritage of Rossendale • Minimise negative impacts upon existing infrastructure capacities by considering its capacity levels and plans for future

upgrades and expansion taking a precautionary approach to flood risk • Maximise energy efficiency and demonstrate effective use of low carbon technologies • Maximise access by public transport, walking and cycling in a manner that promotes safe and inclusive communities and

promote co-location of services and facilities • Enhance and protect the countryside and biodiversity resources including habitats and species • Wherever possible, improve the amount of, links to and the quality of the local network of open spaces and green

infrastructure” Selected Supporting Text Rawtenstall is the largest settlement with the best transport links and is the main retail and service centre for the Borough. Because of this function and the potential demand for new development that would be stimulated if the East Lancashire Railway was re-opened for commuter use it is proposed that the majority of development should be located here. Bacup is the main centre for the east of the Borough and is a focus for regeneration, with a particular focus on maximising the potential of its historic buildings and promoting


132

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

development that will meet the needs of the local population. Haslingden has excellent external links via the A56 and contains a number of key employment locations. The town centre is in need of enhancement that reflects its historic context. Development in other settlements is expected to be primarily focussed in Whitworth with Stacksteads, Waterfoot, Helmshore and Edenfield playing important supporting roles. Improvements to existing employment, retail and service provision will be supported as identified in other policies in this document. In smaller settlements such as Goodshaw, Loveclough, Irwell Vale, Water and Weir development should primarily support local needs. There is a considerable amount of vacant, under-used and previously developed land and buildings. This can be found in virtually all settlements with a significant proportion being in Rawtenstall, and especially Bacup, Haslingden and Whitworth. Re-use of this resource will help improve the quality of the local environment as well as help to reduce the pressure to build on greenfield, peripheral locations. The focus on urban areas is not intended to prohibit necessary development in rural areas such as that which is essential for agriculture and related activities, tourism, sports and leisure and small scale business purposes. Wherever possible such development should be located in villages unless it can be demonstrated that a location in the open countryside is required (see Policy 21). The intention is to ensure that the qualities that make the countryside of the area distinctive be retained. Use of high quality materials, the enhancement of historic buildings and places, and the relationship with open space, natural habitats, waterways and the Rights of Way network (“green infrastructure”) are all particularly important in the local context. The steep valley sides and views from moorland ridges mean that medium/longer distance views from above can be significant. The damp climate of Rossendale combined with the topography results in locally significant problems with surface water run-off. Developments should examine options for sustainable drainage systems. Significantly greater energy efficiency in refurbished as well as new buildings would help to reduce the impact of new development on the utilities networks as well as reducing the existing high per capita production of CO². The high level of car usage together with concentrations of low car ownership means that new development should be made as accessible as possible by alternative means. Location within 400 metres of bus stops on primary bus corridors will be particularly favoured. The narrow Victorian road network means that large areas are difficult to access by large vehicles, including bin lorries. New development should create attractive, safe streets and also take into account the ability to service the area. The latter will be particularly important for refurbishment of older employment premises. The location of services and facilities with housing and employment can all help reduce the need to travel. The use of appropriate local materials, labour and suppliers for building will be pursued. This would both reduce the buildings carbon footprint and to encourage development that reflects the local context. Targets

1. At least 95% to be within urban boundary.


133

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

2. Majority of development to take place in Rawtenstall (30%), Haslingden (20%) and Bacup (20%). 3. Amount of new development on Green Belt or countryside land: 5%.

Policy 24: Planning Application Considerations “In addition to adhering to the policies of this Plan as a whole, applications will be given positive consideration subject to all the relevant requirements below being properly addressed in the supporting documentation. These requirements will include whether the development:

1. Has adequately considered the on and off-site impacts of the proposal in terms of climate change, flood risk, wildlife, natural resource use and pollution and air quality and identified any measures necessary for mitigation and/or enhancement

2. Maximises environmental performance including meeting and where possible exceeding latest good practice guidance such as “Code for Sustainable Homes” and “Building for Life”, management of construction waste, passive heating/cooling and provision of on and off-site renewable energy and/or heat

3. Makes efficient use of land, including where appropriate providing for dual use of facilities. 4. Positively contributes to the townscape, historic environment, local distinctiveness, landscape, biodiversity and provision of

“Green Infrastructure”. 5. Is compatible with its surroundings in terms of style, siting, layout, orientation, passive heating/cooling, visual impact, local

context and views, scale, massing, height, density, materials and detailing. 6. Incorporates public spaces, landscaping, usable open space and public art. 7. Protects the amenity of the area, including residential amenity in terms of satisfactory daylight, sunlight, outlook, privacy, soft

landscaping and mitigating noise and light pollution. 8. Contribute to public safety including through ‘secured by design’ initiatives. 9. Provides direct walking, cycling and public transport access and addresses parking (all modes) and servicing issues as part of

overall design quality including through travel planning 10. Demonstrates that existing drainage, waste water and sewerage infrastructure capacity is maintained and where necessary

enhanced, to enable development to proceed including, where appropriate, the use of sustainable drainage systems (SuDS). 11. Ensures that sustainable storage and disposal of solid waste is positively addressed within the design 12. Ensures where appropriate, equality of access and use for all sections of the community including, for residential proposals,

delivery of “Lifetime Homes” requirements 13. Conforms to policies within Minerals and Waste LDF documents and including safeguarding of resources. In addition extraction

of shallow coal should be considered before construction commences on developments affecting known deposits. 14. Identifies and adequately addresses any issues of contamination or land instability, and incorporates a land remediation

scheme (where appropriate) to the satisfaction of the relevant agency.” Selected Supporting Text This policy sets out topics relevant to the consideration of all planning applications that developers will be expected to consider when making submissions for planning permission. It is not a fully comprehensive list of every matter. Rather it builds upon and should be


134

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

read alongside the other policies of the Core Strategy in particular the Overall Development Approach set out in Policy 1 and the Design principles set out in Policy 23. It does however provides a clear indication of the principal Development Management issues that the Council expects to be relevant when considering planning applications. Following adoption of the Core Strategy the Council will prepare a Site Allocations and Development Management DPD. It is intended that this will include a small number of key Development Management policies that will provide further guidance for developers and officers. The Council also intends to produce Supplementary Planning Documents which will interpret and expand this policy for specific developments, including most particularly a Design SPD, a Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency SPD and SPDs for each of main the town centres. Until these SPDs are produced, any relevant existing Supplementary Planning Guidance notes/Documents will be used, including:

• Alterations and Extensions to Residential Properties SPD • Open Space and Play Equipment Contributions SPD • Re-Use of Buildings in the Countryside SPD

8. Housing

• Policy 2: Meeting Rossendale’s Housing Requirement

• Policy 3: Distribution of Additional Housing

• Policy 4: Affordable and Supported Housing

Policy 2: Meeting Rossendale’s Housing Requirement “The net housing requirement for the period 2011-2026, will be achieved through: 1. Providing at least 3330 net additional dwellings over the plan period 2011-2026 equating to 222 dwellings per year 2. Allocating land to meet the outstanding residual requirement for the period 2011-2026; 3. Delivering at least 65% of all new dwellings on previously developed land across the Borough, except in the Rawtenstall area (see

map x) where at least 40% of all new dwellings will be delivered on previously-developed land; 4. Supporting the reuse and conversion of appropriate buildings for housing; 5. Encouraging higher density developments (60-70dph) in sustainable locations, such as within and adjacent to Rawtenstall, Bacup,

Haslingden and Whitworth and where well served by public transport, with a minimum density of 30dph across the Borough; 6. Safeguarding the character of established residential areas from over-intensive and inappropriate new development; and 7. Prioritising the development of previously developed land. However, Greenfield development will be permitted where:

i. It is for 100% affordable and/or supported housing schemes; or ii. It forms a minor (15% of the overall site size or delivers 9 or less houses) part of a larger development site and is essential to

the successful delivery of the development as a whole; or iii. It delivers an overriding social, economic, or environmental benefit, or iv. The application is for a barn conversion and it can be demonstrated that the site has been marketed for economic uses for 18

months, to the satisfaction of the Council, and is not viable for these purposes.” Selected Supporting Text Planning Policy Statement 3: Housing requires the Core Strategy to look forward 15 years from the point of adoption and therefore we


135

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

have applied an annual housing target of 222, contained in the previously adopted Regional Spatial Strategy for the North West 2008. The SHLAA concludes that Rossendale’s entire 15-year housing requirement can be met on previously-developed land with a surplus of over 5000 potential dwellings on available brownfield and greenfield land. The Core Strategy covers a period of 15years from the date adoption, anticipated to be 2011, taking the plan period for this Core Strategy up to 2026. Given the abolition of the RSS, it is considered rational and appropriate to re-start the plan period and discard any over/under supply that may have occurred against the RSS targets since 2003. During this period (2003-2010) there have been several significant events/factors which have affected and influenced the delivery of new housing in Rossendale, namely:

• Introduction of a housing restraint/moratorium between 2005 – 2007 as a result of the requirements of the Joint Lancashire Structure Plan (2001-2016) reducing housing provision from 220 to 80 dwellings a year

• Introduction of the Regional Spatial Strategy and increases in housing requirement from 80 dwellings per year to 222 dwellings per year

• Onset and impact of the recession on the delivery of new housing between 2008 and 2010 Resulting in an under provision of approximately 300-400 houses since the start of the RSS plan period in 2003. In order to make up this shortfall it would be necessary to significantly increase the annual target over large sections of the plan period. However taking into consideration historic completion rates and trends as well as the economic uncertainty, it is considered that such an approach is neither logical nor realistic. The abolition of the RSS means that the housing delivery requirements previously set out for the plan period (2008-2021) are no longer part of the statutory development plan and as such, the housing targets and monitoring will start from the date of adoption of this Core Strategy for a period of 15 years at the original rate of 222 dwellings per year. In order to deliver 65% of all new dwellings on previously-developed land, it has been necessary to assess the amount of brownfield land available across the Borough. Through this assessment it is apparent that there is not a sufficient amount of suitable previously-developed land available in the Rawtenstall area. It is also recognised, that the Rawtenstall area is one of the more attractive housing markets and is likely to receive a greater amount of housing development than other areas. As the main town centre for Rossendale it is anticipated that the re-opening of the Manchester to Rawtenstall commuter link, will stimulate increased levels of investment and development in the town and this is reflected by lowering the brownfield land target to 40% in the Rawtenstall area. In other areas of the Borough particularly Bacup, Haslingden and Whitworth, there is a large amount of available and suitable previously-developed land. It is therefore considered appropriate to expect these areas to provide increased levels of housing on previously-developed sites to meet the borough-wide target of 65%. This approach will also aid the regeneration of these areas and re-invigorate and revitalise their centres and local communities. Targets


136

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

1. To meet the regional housing provision requirement. 2. 40% of all new dwellings on previously-developed land in the Rawtenstall area. 3. 80% of all new dwellings on previously-developed land in the Bacup area. 4. 80% of all new dwellings on previously-developed land in the Whitworth area. 5. 90% of all new dwellings on previously-developed land in the Bacup area. 6. 50% of all new dwellings on previously-developed land in all other areas.

Policy 3: Distribution of Additional Housing “The scale and distribution of the regional housing requirement within Rossendale will be as follows: 1. The largest number of additional houses will be built in the Rawtenstall area, equating to approximately 30% of the overall

requirement. 2. Smaller but significant numbers of additional houses will be built in the towns of Bacup, Haslingden and Whitworth equating to

approximately 48% of the overall housing requirement. 3. Following these settlements/areas, housing development in the areas of Helmshore, Edenfield, Goodshaw, Loveclough,

Waterfoot, Stacksteads, Britannia, Facit and Shawforth will be permitted having regard to their relative size and function, the need for urban regeneration, housing market renewal, the capacity of infrastructure, opportunities for new housing, the capacity for growth and past house building trends. The combined total of housing development in these areas equates to approximately 20% of the overall requirement.

4. Limited numbers of additional houses will be built in settlements such as Water, Stubbins, Rising Bridge, Irwell Vale, Ewood Bridge and Weir to meet the needs of the settlement and help to create sustainable communities, reflecting their relative size and function and their limited capacity to accommodate growth. In these areas new housing development will make up approximately 2% of the total housing requirement.

5. In villages and smaller settlements, housing development will be of a very limited scale and only permitted where they meet identified local needs.”

Selected Supporting Text The pressures for housing development remain strong in Rossendale, particularly in the more accessible west of the Borough in areas such a Helmshore, Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Edenfield. This demand must be carefully managed to ensure that the qualities of and characteristics that attract people to Rossendale in the first place are not damaged and that demand can be accommodated without placing excessive pressures on existing infrastructure and services. In tandem with high demand in the west, much of the east struggles with housing market decline and therefore needs significant investment and promotion to overcome these


137

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

difficulties. The percentages reflect the size and role of the settlements/areas, market demand and the availability of suitable housing land. The distribution of additional housing within the Borough will take into account potential impacts on sites designated for their nature conservation value. Policy 4: Affordable and Supported Housing “Affordable Housing Delivery of affordable housing will be achieved by: 1. Allocating land specifically for affordable housing development through the Site Allocations DPD; 2. Overall affordable housing targets for all new private sector residential development as follows:

a) A minimum of 30% on Greenfield sites over 8 dwellings. A maximum target of 40% will be sought wherever practicable, particularly on large sites or those within areas of high demand.

b) A 20% requirement on brownfield sites over 15 dwellings. c) A relaxation of the above requirements will only be considered if there are abnormal costs, and the applicant pays for the

Council to approach an independent specialist to undertake a site-specific economic viability assessment to ensure that full affordability potential is reached.

d) Affordable provision should comprise an equal mix of affordable housing tenures. On marginal sites, the Council will be flexible in terms of tenure mix, however the final split should respond to local needs.

e) Presumption will be for on-site provision unless no local need exists. In such cases a commuted sum in lieu of on-site provision will be required to buy vacant residential properties and bring back them into use as affordable units through a Registered Social Provider (RSP) up to a decent homes standard. The Council will look to use its various powers to acquire property if a negotiated price cannot be reached. This may include the use of Compulsory Purchase Orders (CPO) as well as Empty Dwelling Management Orders (EDMO).

3. Supporting “rural exceptions” in small rural settlements for 100% affordable housing schemes to meet an identified local need where the development is small in scale and where that need cannot be met in any other larger settlement.

Supported Housing Supported housing will be achieved by:

2. Allocating land specifically for supported housing development through the Site Allocations DPD. 3. Actively supporting proposals, particularly for elderly accommodation and care provision for those with physical disabilities,

learning difficulties and mental health needs.”


138

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Selected Supporting Text In requiring provision, the Council will have regard to the level of need and split between affordable housing tenures including size, type & form; as identified in the most up to date Strategic Housing Market Assessment; Housing Needs Assessment or similar. Evidence from the Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2008 demonstrates that there is an annual requirement for 327 net additional affordable houses in Rossendale, and recommends a 30 percent contribution target be set to deliver this need, of which 35 percent should be intermediate housing. In terms of size requirements, it also stresses the demand for four or more bedroom houses as well as one bedroom accommodation. In addition, the Affordable Housing Economic Viability Assessment (2009) prepared for Rossendale BC concludes that of 72 sites assessed across the Borough, 78 percent would be viable with a 30 percent affordable housing requirement under ‘normal’ market conditions. However although the assessment concluded that a borough-wide affordable target of 30% was viable, it recommended altering the thresholds at which affordable housing would be required, to maximise affordable housing provision and achieve the redevelopment of brownfield land. Whilst there is an acute affordable housing need in Rossendale, the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (2008) also concludes that there is a large need for supported housing, particularly in terms of suitable and appropriate accommodation for the elderly and those households with specific needs, such as limiting long-term illness. Supported housing or 'housing related support' is available to people with a wide range of support needs, for example:

• people with physical disabilities • older people with extra care needs and those who need support to manage their own homes • people with mental health needs • people with learning disabilities • young people leaving care and those wanting to live independently • people with alcohol and/or substance misuse problems • people fleeing domestic violence • homeless people in temporary accommodation

The location of affordable and supported housing will take into account potential impacts on sites of nature conservation value. 9. Gypsies,

Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

Policy 5: Meeting the Needs of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople “Sufficient housing provision must be made to meet the needs of the whole community. It is proposed that:


139

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

• Policy 5: Meeting the Needs of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

1. Up to 5 permanent pitches and up to 3 transit pitches are provided 2. The preferred areas of search are Haslingden, Waterfoot, Stacksteads and Bacup. 3. Sites will be located in places that have good access to the road network, within easy reach of schools, shops and other facilities,

should have adequate space for business and storage activities and be accessible by foot, cycle or public transport. 4. Sites should be located where they are capable of being served by adequate water and waste infrastructure services 5. All sites should be well landscaped, be close to “green infrastructure” networks and take into account impact on local residents

including noise and light pollution.” Selected Supporting Text In recent years, Rossendale has seen increased interest in Gypsy and Traveller accommodation and at present, there is only one authorised permanent pitch. Site selection should take into account national guidance contained in “Designing Gypsy and Traveller Sites: Good Practice Guide” (CLG May 2008). The Council will also expect all applicants to demonstrate that they have considered the criteria set out in the policy. The site should be large enough to accommodate not only living accommodation but also storage area for any business related activities. Many Gypsy families contain children and access to services is important. The location of pitches should therefore be close to (within one mile) of at least two of the following: shops, school, community facilities, GP. Road access should be capable of accommodating vans or rigid axle lorries and ideally located within 400 metres of a bus route. Access to water and waste services (including rubbish collection) is important. If the proposed plot is not on the mains water and sewerage network the applicant will be expected to demonstrate that suitable alternative arrangements are available. Access to open space is important for children and may also be required if the family keep livestock. Sites should be sensitively screened both to provide privacy and to reduce any visual impact on neighbours. Screening should take into account noise reduction and light pollution, particularly if the site is in a rural location and be appropriate to the local context. Indicators: 1. Meeting any needs identified through regional / sub-regional surveys.

10. Retail and Town Centre

• Policy11: Retail and other Town Centre Uses

• Policy 13:

Policy 11: Retail and other Town Centre Uses “Retail development, together with other town centre uses, including offices, leisure, arts, culture and tourist facilities, will be focussed within the defined town and local centres. Major proposals will be directed to Rawtenstall with other larger schemes encouraged to locate in the district centres of Bacup and Haslingden. The Retail hierarchy is set out below:


140

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Protecting Key Local Retail and other Services

Key Retail Centre: Rawtenstall District Centres: Bacup, Haslingden Local Centre: Waterfoot, Whitworth Neighbourhood Centre: All other centres (including Edenfield, Stacksteads, Helmshore, Crawshawbooth) This hierarchy supports the Council’s vision of achieving a quality retail development at the Valley Centre in Rawtenstall, with ancillary local retail in the other centres. Retail proposals will be directed to the Primary Shopping Areas (PSA). Proposals for non-retail uses appropriate to town centres will be considered favourably within the town centre boundary, which encompasses but extends beyond the PSA. Both the Primary Shopping Area (PSA) and town centre boundary have been defined for Rawtenstall, Bacup and Haslingden. For the smaller settlements of Waterfoot and Whitworth the town centre boundary is the same as the PSA. Proposals for new convenience floorspace of greater than 200m² will be resisted unless:

• it forms part of a wider town, district or local centre regeneration scheme, and • it can be demonstrated to the Council’s satisfaction that it will not have a negative impact on the vitality and viability of other

centres. All developments (convenience and comparison) will be expected to provide Impact Assessments where they are above the following thresholds:

• Rawtenstall – 750m² • Bacup and Haslingden – 500m² • All other centres and outside defined settlement boundaries– 200m².”

Selected Supporting Text See document for maps of town centre boundaries. The Primary Shopping Area (PSA) has been defined for Rawtenstall, Bacup and Haslingden. This is the primary boundary for retail development, and is made up of primary shopping frontages and contiguous secondary frontages. The town centres of Waterfoot and Whitworth have also been redefined. As these centres do not have areas of predominantly leisure, business and other main town centre uses adjacent to the primary shopping area, the town centre does not extend beyond the PSA. No boundaries have been set for the smaller neighbourhood centres. Indicators 1. Number of planning permissions granted for retail developments outside defined town and district centres. 2. Percentage of retail developments with floorspaces above thresholds specified in RLDF 11 with impact assessments provided


141

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Policy 13: Protecting Key Local Retail and other Services “It is proposed that smaller retail and other service centres will be supported and protected from loss. The important role of smaller, independent shops will be supported in all defined shopping centres with schemes to enhance and / or expand such facilities given positive consideration. The Borough has a supply of ‘corner shops’ which serve local communities. These need to be protected to avoid longer trips being made to other centres, which has implications for inclusivity, as well as reducing the need to travel. Where the Council considers the loss of the retail facility may have negative impacts for the local community, it will be necessary to provide additional information and market the building for a period of at least 18 months. The existing markets at Bacup, Haslingden and Rawtenstall will be retained, as they provide both employment and investment opportunities, widen the retail offer and provide potential for attracting tourism. Consideration will only be given to relocation where: • this forms part of a wider regeneration initiative and • it positively reinforces the role of the market” Selected Supporting Text Independent shops are important in terms of the services and access to goods that they provide, as well as the jobs and investment they create. They also contribute to the distinct sense of place of the Borough’s settlements. Some outlets, such as top of the range clothes shops, attract a clientele from outside the Borough. Working with partners the Council will seek to support local retailers through initiatives such as shopfront upgrading. Indicator Loss of independent shops becoming vacant or changing to another use.

11. Sustainable Communities

• Policy 7: Social Infrastructure

• Policy 22: Planning Contributions

Policy 7: Social Infrastructure “It is proposed that social infrastructure improvements and provisions will be delivered as follows: The loss of social infrastructure such as pubs, post offices, community halls, youth centres and open space that require a change of use application will be resisted, particularly in local centres and small settlements. All thefollowing factors will be considered when assessing applications: • The availability of alternatives within 15 minutes travelling time by non car modes • The financial viability of the existing use


142

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

• Policy 23: Promoting High Quality Design and Spaces

• The results of marketing the site for existing or other community uses for a minimum period of six months • Whether it is possible for the community facility to be retained in the same locality, but combined with another use

A positive approach will be taken to the development of new and enhanced social infrastructure, especially where this creates options for a variety of uses and user groups and reduces the need to travel. The Council will support the delivery of broadband and communications technology to all parts of the Borough and will encourage and facilitate its use.” Selected Supporting Text The “Spatial Planning in Lancashire: Annual Monitoring Report 2” (LCC 2009) indicates that the percentage of the population with access to five basic services within 1km (food shop, GP, primary school, post office and bus stop) has declined from 59.4% in 2003/04 to 46.2% in 2007/08. This is primarily due to closure of Post Offices and consolidation of health facilities in Rawtenstall and Bacup as well as the linear nature of the settlements. Places such as Edenfield, Helmshore, Stacksteads, Water and Weir all perform poorly against these criteria. Leisure facilities in the Borough are also being consolidated. This will result in improved swimming pools being constructed in Haslingden and Marl Pits, Rawtenstall. The latter will also include a new outdoor football/netball area. Equipment in parks and play areas will be progressively improved in line with priorities set out in the Council’s Open Space Strategy and a programme set in place to enhance the Borough’s principal parks to “Green Flag” standard. Indicators 1. Index of Multiple Deprivation - access to service indicator 2. Change of use applications from pubs and post offices 3. Access to 5 basic services 4. Number of Green Flag registered parks Policy 22: Planning Contributions “Where developments will create additional need for improvements/ provision of services or facilities or exacerbate an existing deficiency, contributions will be sought to ensure that the appropriate enhancements/improvements are made and appropriate management arrangements are inplace. Contributions will be sought for (but not limited to) the following areas:

Sustainable Waste Management Countryside Access Built Heritage Affordable and Supported Housing, including Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople Sites. Crime and Disorder


143

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Landscape Character and Design Green Infrastructure Natural Heritage Biodiversity Youth & Community Inland Waterways Public Realm and Public Art Low and Zero Carbon Energy Generation Energy Efficiency Provision/funding for training and employment opportunities for local residents

Where proposals involve the development of previously-developed land or buildings, the Council will only apply those contributions deemed necessary to help deliver the site and/or provide benefits to the immediate community. Further guidance on planning obligations will be provided in a subsequent Supplementary Planning Document (SPD). Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) The provision, maintenance and improvement of Rossendale’s infrastructure is key to the creation of sustainable communities and delivery of development. Under the Planning Act 2008 and the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010, infrastructure includes:

• Roads and other transport facilities • Flood defences • Schools and other educational facilities • Medical facilities • Sporting and recreational facilities; and • Open spaces

The Council intends to apply planning obligations to the above forms of infrastructure in accordance with the Section 106 tests set out in the Community Infrastructure Levy Regulations 2010 until such a time as the Council has prepared a Charging Schedule.” Selected Supporting Text A Supplementary Planning Document will be prepared to amplify the policy, identify priorities and set out the criteria for calculating planning obligations as well as details on administration and monitoring fees. In addition, the Council will consider implementing the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) to implement a standard charge for developments which put increased pressure on existing infrastructure. A detailed infrastructure assessment of the Borough and an infrastructure delivery plan will be undertaken and maintained throughout


144

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

the course of the plan period and beyond, should the Community Infrastructure Levy be considered appropriate for Rossendale. Indicators 1. Percentage of planning applications approved with planning contributions. 2. Number of major residential developments which do not have affordable housing provision. RLDF 23: Promoting High Quality Design and Spaces “The Council will ensure that Rossendale’s places and buildings are attractive, safe and easy to use, by ensuring that all new developments: • Promote the image of the Borough, through the enhancement of gateway locations and key approach corridors. • Are of the highest standard of design that respects and responds to local context, distinctiveness and character. • Contribute positively to local identity and heritage in terms of scale, density, layout , materials and access. • Maintain the relationship between the urban areas and countryside, particularly at the rural-urban interface where the contrast

between the natural and built environments is most prominent. • Have public and private spaces that are safe, attractive, easily distinguished, accessible and complement the existing built form. • Protect important local and longer-distance views. • Use locally sourced sustainable, high quality and innovative materials appropriate for the development and its surroundings

including recycled materials wherever feasible. • Engage with their surroundings and provide adequate natural surveillance (overlooking) for neighbouring streets and spaces. • Promoting high quality landscaping and construction for streets and public spaces • Incorporate well defined and recognisable routes, spaces, interchanges, landmarks and entrances reflecting guidance in “Manual

for Streets” that provides for convenient movement ,that are well connected to public transport, community facilities and services of individual communities and neighbourhoods, without compromising security.

• Incorporate car parking design that is integrated with the existing public realm and other pedestrian and cycle routes. • Create a sense of ownership by providing a clear definition between public and private spaces. • Are designed to make crime difficult to commit by increasing the risk of detection and provide (where necessary) for well designed

security features. • Provide places that are designed with management and maintenance in mind, avoiding the creation of gated communities. • Be flexible to respond to future social, technological and economic needs. • Provide active ground floor frontages where located in town and district centres.

• Contribute to a reduction in energy consumption and CO2 emissions and facilitate adaptation to climate change through efficient layouts and designs which accord with or exceed current national standards (such as Code for Sustainable Homes, BREEAM and Building Regulations).

• Are subject to a Building for Life assessment where the development in question is a major residential scheme)”. Selected Supporting Text


145

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

High quality design that is responsive to the local context is essential if the character of Rossendale is to be both protected and enhanced. Designs based on standard templates applied on a national basis may not be appropriate, especially in sensitive locations. A high quality built environment involves consideration of the visual appearance of individual buildings but also how those buildings relate to the places in which they are located. In Rossendale the relationship of town and countryside, hill and valley, stone and other materials are particularly important. The topography of the area means that visual impact of an individual building or group of buildings can be as greater when looked down upon from higher ground or from the valley below than it is within its immediate situation. Scale, massing, materials and roofscape can all significant factors. All proposals will therefore be considered for their impact on the broader surroundings as well as on the local area. Much of the character of the built environment reflects the use of local materials, particularly stone. The design of new development should wherever use locally sourced materials. The use of local stone, including recycled materials, will be encouraged. However, the use of sustainable modern materials that will be durable in the predominantly damp climate will be considered where this contributes to a high quality proposal. The experience and quality of places is strongly influenced by the relationship of spaces between buildings as well as the buildings themselves. This includes both hard surfaces and appropriate soft landscaping. National guidance in “Manual for Streets” emphasises the role of streets, squares and pedestrian areas in creating attractive, safe and permeable multi-use spaces. Rossendale Borough Council will apply these principles not only in looking at the design of the development itself but how well it integrates with the surrounding street pattern and “green infrastructure”. Good quality developments will be expected to use design features to limit crime, including natural surveillance and consideration of long term maintenance, especially of the public realm. Designs should accommodate the car, including in the provision of parking, but should not be dominated by the car. Residential and town centre developments should in particular consider how people can meet and children play. Direct and safe walking and cycling links to key services such as shops, schools and bus stops will expected in design proposals. New buildings and places should be capable of accommodating change during their expected lifetime. This includes adaptability to both the changing external environment and the requirements of users. Rossendale Borough Council will expect all new development to meet and where possible exceed the latest national standards for sustainable development both in design of individual buildings and layouts. Orientation, insulation, use of passive heating, renewable technologies, appropriate planting, green roofs and sustainable drainage are examples of features that should be considered. Adaptability for users is also an important consideration. In an era of increasing life expectancy “Building for Life” standards will allow people to stay in their homes longer while well-designed business space should be adaptable to the requirements of future users. Indicators

1. Number of applications submitted outside the urban boundary in the countryside or Green Belt. 2. Number and type of applications approved outside the urban boundary in the countryside or Green Belt. 80% of all rural

applications to be on previously-developed land. 3. Need and demand for services in rural areas


146

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

4. Amount and types of farm diversification 5. Greenfield land development and barn conversions.

12. Transport and

Accessibility

• Policy 8: Transport proposals including Rawtenstall-Manchester Railway link

• Policy 9: Accessibility

Policy 8: Transport proposals including Rawtenstall-Manchester Railway link “It is proposed that transport improvements and provision within Rossendale will be achieved as set out below: Rawtenstall-Manchester Railway The East Lancashire Railway corridor from Rawtenstall to the Borough boundary will be safeguarded for combined use as a commuter and heritage railway operation with land in the vicinity of Ewood Bridge to be investigated as a “Park and Ride” site. Pedestrian links from Rawtenstall Railway Station to the town centre will be enhanced. Buses Working in conjunction with key partners such as Lancashire County Council and the bus operators the following measures will be pursued to enhance the road based public transport network:

• Development of a new bus station in Rawtenstall town centre • Introduction of bus priority measures at key congestion locations and improvement of bus stops • Bus Park and Ride facilities in Rawtenstall

Roads The Council will work with the Highway Authority to reduce congestion at key locations within the Borough, such as the Gyratory in Rawtenstall, the Tesco roundabout at Haslingden, Stacksteads and the Waterfoot area. It will also work with the Highways Agency to pursue the most effective management of the A56/M66 corridor for all users Parking Car parking standards, including provision for the mobility impaired and cycles are included as an Appendix to this document. Working with partners, Car Parking Management in Rawtenstall, Bacup and Haslingden town centres and other locations will be undertaken as part of an overall policy of maintaining business vitality, integrated transport access and creation of attractive places. In older residential and business areas with specific local parking problems a range of measures will be supported, including new off-street provision where this does not cause environmental or highway issues.” Selected Supporting Text


147

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

47% of the Borough’s workforce commutes to employment outside the Borough. Peak hour congestion on the M66 is an increasing problem. The East Lancashire Railway is a key asset for the Borough. It currently operates a successful tourist service between Rawtenstall, Bury and Heywood (near Rochdale). It also has potential to perform an important role as a commuter service enabling a 35 minute journey from Rawtenstall to and from central Manchester. Implementation of this could significantly contribute to raising the profile of the Borough and contribute to regeneration. Provision of “Park and Ride” facilities in the area of Ewood Bridge is of strategic importance to this proposal. Facilities will be needed in the vicinity of Rawtenstall station to encourage people to leave their cars while improved walking routes and bus interchange will also be pursued. These sites will be subject to detailed consideration through the Site Allocations DPD and related documents. Appraisal of how best to deliver the whole scheme is being undertaken for a cross-border partnership of planning and transport authorities participating in the East Lancashire/West Rochdale Area Study (ELWRAS). This is being led by Greater Manchester Integrated Transport Authority. Redevelopment of the bus station will be considered as a part of the broader regeneration of the town centre including the Valley Centre and will be examined through a Masterplanning/SPD exercise which is due to report by the end of 2010. Bus waiting facilities elsewhere in the Borough will be improved wherever opportunities exist. Express services to Manchester suffer delays within and outside the Borough due to congestion. Bus priority measures will be examined as part of the ELWRAS Study and will be developed in association with Lancashire County Council and the Highways Agency. Options for bus based “Park and Ride” in and around Rawtenstall will also be appraised. It is proposed initially that the 2009 proposed RSS Partial Review standards will be used for Development Control purposes. Indicators 1. Congestion – average journey time per mile during the morning peak (NI 167). 2. Number of ELR users-commuter and tourist 3. Number of local bus journeys originating in the area (NI177) 4. Planning permissions granted with car parking provision in excess of adopted standards. Policy 9: Accessibility “It is proposed that the following principles be applied to all new development within Rossendale: The Transport User Hierarchy will form the basis for consideration of all applications New development within the urban boundary should be concentrated close to main public transport corridors such as Rising Bridge-Whitworth or within 400 metres of a bus stop with regular services. Enhanced links to key services and employment opportunities, including in adjacent Boroughs, such as Kingsway in Rochdale, will be pursued. Supporting innovative schemes for “demand responsive” transport will be pursued for hard to access locations. Accessibility planning will be used as a tool to identify the most appropriate form of response.


148

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

The design and improvement of streets and the wider urban environment as attractive places for all users will be given high priority. The footpath, cycleway and bridleway network including the Rossendale Way, Irwell Sculpture Trail and National Cycle Network will be developed and enhanced in an integrated manner as part of Rossendale’s “Green Infrastructure” and Tourism Strategy. Measures to encourage use by the mobility impaired and those experiencing health issues will be promoted. The Council will promote the delivery of its services as well as those of key stakeholders in the Borough, through means that where possible avoid the need to travel (e.g. web-based services and local provision) and that can be implemented in a cost-efficient and effective manner.” Selected Supporting Text National policy on transport, e.g. in “Manual for Streets” (2007) and DfT “Guidance on Transport Assessment” supports a transport user hierarchy. Rossendale Borough Council will reflect this in consideration of applications and policy documents in the following order of priority: • Pedestrians • Cyclists and equestrians • Emergency Vehicles and refuse collection • Public Transport, motorcycles and taxis • Freight movement • Private cars The hierarchy approach does not mean that the private cars are not important, rather that the impact of the proposal on users higher up the hierarchy is given consideration first and that the design of the scheme reflects this. This supports both sustainable travel and better designed places. Some wards in Rossendale, in particular around Bacup and Stacksteads, have low car ownership rates. Locating new development close to good quality public transport links is important for ensuring that individuals have opportunities to access key services such as health, education and leisure. This equally applies to origins (new housing) as well as destinations. Main transport corridors are classed as those with at least a 15 minute frequency peak hour service while regular services should have at least a 30 minute peak hour frequency. Traditional bus services operate most efficiently on routes with lots of users, such as Haslingden-Rawtenstall-Bacup. Serving outlying housing estates is often unprofitable and a more flexible “demand responsive” approach is often most appropriate. Accessibility planning techniques such as use of “Accession” computer software and Travel Planning can be used to identify areas with poor links to social infrastructure such as Hospitals and Schools and can help examine and tailor the most appropriate ways to address this. This work is undertaken by Lancashire County Council but the Council will also expect developers of large proposals requiring frequent public access (e.g. major health facilities) to undertake such work. The Council will work with Lancashire County Council and local businesses to enhance access by non-car means to employment concentrations such as Carrs Industrial Estate at Haslingden.


149

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

New development proposals and regeneration schemes will be assessed against their ability to deliver attractive streets and public places building on good practice in “Manual for Streets”. Where new footpaths are proposed it is expected that these should provide attractive, direct, safe links and integrate well into the existing networks, including “green infrastructure” identified in Policy 17. Upgrading and better maintenance of existing infrastructure will also be encouraged. Rossendale has the densest public rights of way network in Lancashire but much of it is in poor condition. The network has great potential for active tourism which has already been demonstrated by initiatives such as the Mary Towneley Loop bridleway as well as providing physical and mental health benefits for local residents. Public footpaths and bridleways are an essential component of the Boroughs “Green Infrastructure” resource and plays an important role in linking the towns to the nearby countryside. Working with partners’ emphasis will be on developing good quality networks. Indicators 1. Access to services and facilities by public transport, walking and cycling (NI 175) 2. Working age people with access to employment by public transport (and other specified modes) (NI176) 3. % of Rights of Way network in good condition 4. Percentage of new developments within 400m of a bus stop with regular services.

13. Tourism

• Policy 14: Tourism

• Policy15: Overnight Visitor Accommodation

Policy 14: Tourism “Tourism, and in particular the active sports industry, is important to Rossendale, and is a key opportunity for the Borough. The Development of tourism will be promoted throughout the Borough, building on leisure pursuits and the unique sense of place within the Valley, giving particular emphasis to the east of the Borough. Tourism throughout the Borough will be promoted in the following ways:

• Ensuring through the Allocations Document that key sites are identified for tourism in general and specifically to support the “Adrenaline Gateway”

• The development, extension and upgrading of footpaths, cycleways and bridleways (specifically the Rossendale Way, Irwell Sculpture Trail and Mary Townley Loop, and more generally the Public Rights of Way network), supported by appropriate signage, interpretation and public art

• Events promotion • Taking a positive approach to development of complementary accommodation and hospitality facilities.

Rossendale has a strong cultural offer, and proposals for the enhancement of existing facilities and activities (and supporting infrastructure, including enhanced access through car parking, bike racks, public realm and public transport improvements) and the development of new facilities and activities will be considered favourably, unless there are unacceptable impacts on landscape quality and visual intrusion (including lighting and noise pollution), amenity to neighbours, or on nature conservation assets. The Council will seek to mitigate any negative effects on the transport network brought about by increased tourism development, and will seek developer contributions as appropriate in line with policy RLDF22.


150

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Planning proposals for the expansion and enhancement of creative industries such as artist studios and the theatres in Bacup and Waterfoot will be given positive consideration. The countryside and features of local heritage interest will be protected and enhanced for their own value, their value to local residents and for their tourism value. Key biodiversity sites and landscape assets will be conserved and where possible enhanced alongside the development of the local tourist industry - in particular within the designated West Pennine Moors area and the moorland of the South Pennines. Access to tourism specific training will, through cross-sector partnership, be actively supported in line with Policy 6.” Selected Supporting Text The Council is committed to promoting the tourism opportunities available within the Borough and recognises the additional opportunities, which will be available to local residents. The “Adrenaline Gateway” is a concept that seeks to market and develop extreme and outdoor sports facilities in the Borough. A mountain biking facility at the disused Lee Quarry near Bacup is attracting riders from throughout the north-west. Funding for an extension of the facility to Cragg Quarry has been secured and will provide additional walking and mountain biking trails using rights of way and old tramways. In addition an indoor facility and “basecamp” is proposed near Bacup. Other major outdoor sports facilities include Ski Rossendale near Rawtenstall (which is in need of major refurbishment in the next five years) and the Mary Towneley Loop bridleway. Long distance walkways include the Rossendale Way and Irwell Sculpture Trail, and it is intended that through Policy 9 (on Accressibility) the footpath, cycleway and bridleway network will be developed and enhanced. Rossendale has a network of creative art providers including theatres, artists and sculptors which both provide employment and attract visitors. Indicators 1. Number of tourism-related jobs generated within the Borough. 2. Number of planning permissions granted for tourism-related developments. 3. Number of day visitors and longer stay visitors to Rossendale. Policy 15: Overnight Visitor Accommodation “The Council will take a positive approach to new small scale visitor accommodation of quality. This includes hotels, bed and breakfast establishments, bed and tack, camping and caravanning sites and camping barns. This is particularly where use is made of existing buildings, and: where appropriate to their locality, including in terms of size; complement existing tourism facilities; access is good by a variety of modes (with no adverse effects on the local road network); the capacity of existing infrastructure is suitable; there are no harmful effects on the landscape; and where need can be demonstrated.


151

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

The development of supporting ancillary facilities such as cycle storage or horse paddocks will be encouraged. Any large scale hotel proposals (40 bedrooms or over) should be located in or adjacent the town centres of Rawtenstall or Bacup. Outside these centres, large scale hotel proposals will only be supported where they form part of a wider regeneration scheme, can demonstrate a wider community benefit and access to the site can be provided by a variety of modes.” Selected Supporting Text Joint work is being undertaken with adjoining East Lancashire authorities under the Pennine Lancashire brand, which has identified Rossendale as having one of the lowest numbers of overnight accommodation stays. As the tourism offer improves it is expected that the number of overnight stays will increase. Opportunities including traditional bed and breakfast establishments, bed and tack along the bridleways and camping and caravan sites will be encouraged. Most new visitor accommodation is expected to be small scale (offering no more than 10 bed spaces or pitches) and could in many cases encourage the re-use of existing buildings. Caravan site proposals should be able to demonstrate good access arrangements and be well screened to minimise visual impact. Any new developments will be required to take appropriate steps to prevent any negative impacts on the landscape, heritage features (or their settings), biodiversity and sites of importance for nature conservation. Indicators 1. Number of planning permissions approved for bed & breakfast and small hotel facilities 2. Percentage of large hotel developments (≥40 rooms) located in or adjacent to either Rawtenstall or Bacup town centres. 3. Number of caravan sites, camping facilities and bunk barns given planning permission.

14. Skills, Employment and Economy

• Policy 6: Training and Skills

• Policy 10: Provision for Employment

• Policy 21: Supporting the Rural Economy

Policy 6: Training and Skills “It is proposed that the following approach be taken toward improving and providing new opportunities for training and skills be achieved as follows:

• The Council will work closely with public, private and voluntary sector partners to maximise access to training and work opportunities for those wanting to enter the labour market or seeking to upgrade existing skills including through the negotiation of Local Employment Charters as part of the planning application process. The enhancement of educational and training facilities including plans for a facility for 14-21year olds in the Bacup area will be actively supported.

• The Council will particularly seek to maximise training opportunities for residents living in the more deprived parts of the Borough

• The Council will seek to negotiate, where appropriate, training agreements and other measures with employers to ensure that new development contributes to raising skills levels within the Borough and increasing the number of local people in employment.

• Training opportunities in all sectors of the economy will be encouraged but with particular emphasis on the following sectors: o ICT and specialist engineering


152

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

and its Communities

o Tourism and leisure o Renewable energy engineering, manufacture and installation o Traditional skills”

Selected Supporting Text Rossendale has a number of wards with concentrations of low educational attainment (worst 20% nationally). This includes the centre of Haslingden, the eastern end of Stacksteads, parts of Bacup and the Hall Carr area of Rawtenstall. High levels of benefit dependency, restrictions in employment to low pay/low skill jobs and broader social and environmental problems lead directly from this. Efforts to enhance access to skills and training will be focussed on benefitting the areas of the Borough and individuals most in need. Further and Higher Education opportunities are currently limited with students on vocational courses such as NVQs currently having to travel outside the Borough. This reduces uptake of such courses, especially in the east of Rossendale. A partnership is seeking to develop a major new facility near Bacup. Targeted at the 14-21 age group it will specifically address training issues for sectors such as construction, catering and health. It is hoped that this will significantly enhance educational uptake and reduce deprivation in the Borough. Training and Skills development will be encouraged across all sectors of the economy including the construction and retail trades. Reviving and enhancing traditional skills such as stonemasons and blacksmiths would help reinforce local distinctiveness. Particular focus will be paid to diversifying the economy and raising local wage levels, e.g. in the ICT and specialised engineering sectors. The growth of renewable technologies offers the opportunity for enhancing skills to operate in this sector. The tourism sector offers a range of jobs and the Council would want to support training that will enable growth in this sector. Indicators: 1. Percentage of working age population qualified to at least NVQ level 4 (NI 165). 2. Percentage of relevant local population with access by non-car modes to (a) primary school; (b) secondary school; (c) further education facilities within 15 minutes for primary schools and 30 minutes for secondary/further education. 3. Skills gaps in the current workforce reported by employers (NI 174). 4. Number of Local Employment Charters a) conditioned as part of planning consent b) as a % of all Employment Charters Policy 10: Provision for Employment “The Council together with developers and other partners will seek to provide sufficient employment land to meet the Borough’s requirement of 20.84 hectares for B1, B2 and B8 use classes (i.e. for Business, General Industrial and Storage and Distribution) outlined in the Employment Land Review 2009 and in line with the current and adopted regional policy. New provision will be informed by the most up to date employment land study or similar. The Council will continue to encourage the retention and growth of its indigenous companies, providing support and facilities for new


153

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

smaller scale hi-tech and creative industries, and encouraging business start-ups by supporting ‘incubator units’ and ‘move-on facilities’ (small, affordable units for new businesses). Employment opportunities related to increasing Rossendale’s tourism offer and enhancing its visitor economy will also be supported where appropriate and complies with other policies in the Core Strategy. It is expected that new sites will be needed to meet demand in the Rawtenstall area and the Bacup, Waterfoot and Stacksteads Corridor. This provision will be met through the Allocations Development Plan Document, where the Council will protect the best sites in terms of their location, access and suitability. New proposals should primarily be located within the defined urban boundary and maximise the use of previously developed land and buildings, meet high energy standards, and be accessible by means other than the private car. In particular the Council will seek to protect and make best use of key employment locations in Rawtenstall (New Hall Hey), Bacup (Futures Park), Haslingden (Carrs Industrial Estate) and Rising Bridge. Renovation of older industrial estates will be encouraged to improve their attractiveness, and support will be given to encourage re-use of mill buildings for employment purposes, where appropriate. Office development (B1 and A2 uses) should be primarily located in or adjacent to the town centres of Rawtenstall, Bacup and Haslingden. The loss (or partial loss) of existing employment sites to non employment generating uses will be supported where:

(a) the access to the site is poor and cannot be improved, and (b) the current use has an adverse impact on the neighbouring land uses, and (c) re-development for employment uses is economically unviable and the site is unlikely to be used for existing or future

employment purposes, and (d) the site has been marketed for 12 months, or less in exceptional circumstances, using a methodology agreed by the Council (e) the redevelopment has no negative impacts on surrounding land uses.

The re-use and retention of suitable buildings, including those in rural areas, for appropriate employment generating uses will be supported where:

• it assists diversification of the existing employment base, or • it supports the creation or growth of a local business, or • it retains buildings of significant architectural historic or artistic interest, or • it contributes to a wider regeneration initiative, and in all cases • the proposal promotes the enhancement of the environment and accessibility provision, minimises negative environmental and

transport impacts and makes best use of the existing space. No adverse impacts will be permitted on sites of international nature conservation value.

The Council will in general support the creation and expansion of small businesses within the Borough, and promote flexible start up accommodation in the form of small offices and industrial units within the key settlements of Rawtenstall, Bacup and Haslingden.


154

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

‘Move on’ facilities will also be encouraged to support their growth, such as at New Hall Hey. Opportunities for home-working will be encouraged, where appropriate. Proposals for creative industries in Waterfoot and Bacup will be given positive consideration, in line with this policy.” Selected Supporting Text The Borough’s residents tend to be employed as managers, professionals or in administrative work (61% compared to a national average of 55%). The lack of skills, particularly in some deprived wards to the east of the Borough, is significant and the Council is committed to working with its partners to set up a vocational training centre in the east of the Borough, most likely at Futures Park. The Employment Land Review has noted that many of even the more popular industrial estates are in need of renovation to increase their attractiveness and meet the demands of modern businesses. Furthermore, the need for both start up and follow on accommodation to develop and foster new businesses has been identified. A site is already under construction at Rising Bridge and it is intended that through partner working more of these facilities will be provided throughout the Borough. Indicators: 1. Annual amount of additional employment land provided. 2. Employment land provided: (a) within urban boundary; (b) within 400m of regular public transport service. 3. Number of planning permissions granted for employment sites not in Rawtenstall, Bacup or Haslingden town centres. Policy 21: Supporting the Rural Economy and its Communities The rural environment and economy will be protected and enhanced through the following principles: Development will be restricted to existing rural settlement boundaries and within identified major developed sites. Outside of these areas, proposals should demonstrate the social and/or economic needs/benefits for the local rural community and strict consideration will be given to the impact of rural development on the countryside (including the natural environment) and/or Green Belt. Support will be given to the social and economic needs of rural communities by encouraging:

• The retention or expansion of appropriately sized businesses; • The re-use or replacement of suitable rural buildings for employment generating uses; • Proposals seeking to widen local facilities and services for everyday needs • Live-work units; • Diversification of the agricultural economy for business purposes; • Sustainable tourism developments, including recreation and leisure uses appropriate to a countryside location such as horse-

related activities; • Arts and crafts based industries; • Technological developments needed to facilitate employment development in rural areas and help address social exclusion;


155

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

• The improvement of public transport links to identified urban centres, employment areas and visitor attractions. • Increased accessibility to and from rural communities by sustainable modes of travel.

In all cases, the Council will seek to protect the most productive and versatile agricultural land in the Borough, including agricultural practices unique to the area. Selected Supporting Text Whilst the spatial vision for Rossendale states that services, facilities and future development should take place within existing urban areas and centres, it is essential that a framework for the delivery of rural regeneration – including affordable housing, rural services, environmental management and economic activity is provided. There is a clear link between the economic stability of rural areas, and the likely success in achieving a well-managed countryside. Reflecting this, it will be particularly important to encourage environmentally sensitive schemes which capitalise on the tourism potential of the rural parts of the Borough. The importance of providing for the social and economic needs of rural communities and supporting the rural economy are key considerations for the Council. Many aspects of the Core Strategy influence the sustainability of the rural economy, including the scale, location and type of housing (Policies RLDF 2 and 3) as well as environmental considerations (Policy RLDF 17). A careful balance is required to support proposals that assist the economic sustainability of local communities, whilst addressing any potential environmental consequences. Indicators: 1. Number of applications submitted outside the urban boundary in the countryside or Green Belt. 2. Number and type of applications approved outside the urban boundary in the countryside or Green Belt. 3. Need and demand for services in rural areas 4. Amount and types of farm diversification 5. Greenfield land development and barn conversions Targets

1. Sufficient services to meet the needs of local population. 2. 80% of all rural applications to be on previously-developed land.

15. Built Environment

• Policy 16: Preserving and Enhancing

Policy 16: Preserving and Enhancing Rossendale’s Built Environment “The Council will protect, conserve, preserve and enhance Rossendale’s historic built environment including Listed Buildings, Conservation Areas, Registered Parks and Gardens, Scheduled Ancient Monuments, archaeological sites, historic landscapes and locally identified buildings, sites and structures. These heritage assets all contribute to the local distinctiveness and character of the area. Their futures, including their settings will be safeguarded and secured by:

1. Promoting the positive management of the Borough's heritage assets, avoiding unnecessary loss and requiring appropriate


156

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Rossendale’s Built Environment

mitigation of any negative impacts. 2. Extending the heritage protection for areas and/or buildings worthy of retention, conservation and enhancement through the

designation of appropriate additional Conservation Areas and Listing. 3. Enhancing the value of Rossendale’s historic built environment by carrying out Conservation Area Appraisals, implementing

Conservation Area Management Plans and public access measures. 4. Protecting significant urban public realm (space) from development. 5. Ensuring that all development is:

a. Located in a way that respects the distinctive quality of the historic landscape and setting and retains or enhances the character and context.

b. Of a high standard of design, reinforcing the local distinctiveness of Rossendale 6. Encouraging innovative new design(s), where it responds to the character, scale and setting of historic buildings and areas. 7. Maximising the potential for the re-use of buildings of historic or local interest for appropriate uses to ensure their future

longevity. However where this is not possible/appropriate, considerate and sensitive redevelopment will be supported, subject to advice from the Councils’ Conservation Team and English Heritage.

8. The Council will support those schemes and proposals which contribute to conservation-led regeneration, particularly where they exploit the regeneration potential of the textile mill-towns and traditional architecture of rural villages within Rossendale.”

Selected Supporting Text Rossendale has a distinctive historic landscape and built environment. Whilst many of its townscapes are dominated by buildings of nineteenth and twentieth century date, they sit within an older pattern of settlement, and there are many buildings, structures and sites that pre-date the industrial revolution. Both these early features and later buildings of locally-quarried stone have combined with local topography to produce unique towns containing many important local assets. Accordingly, all new development should be based on a thorough understanding of the context, significance and local distinctiveness of the site and its surroundings and should be of a high quality in terms of its urban, landscape and architectural design and use of materials. There are nine Conservation Areas in Rossendale at various stages of renew and appraisal including – Bacup Town Centre, Chatterton/Strongstry, Fallbarn, Goodshawfold, Higher Cloughfold, Irwell Vale, Loveclough Fold, Rawtenstall Town Centre and Whitworth Square. Other areas have been identified for future appraisal and evaluation as additional designations. It is anticipated that by 2015 all designated conservation areas will have Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans.


157

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

16. Green Infrastructure

• Policy 17: Rossendale’s Green Infrastructure

Policy 17: Rossendale’s Green Infrastructure “The Council will promote the protection, enhancement and where appropriate the expansion of the Green Infrastructure network in the following ways: 1. Identification and illustration of the Green Infrastructure network 2. Preparation of more detailed policies through the future Site Allocations DPD, assisted by the definition of key national, regional

and the most significant local sites on the Proposals Map DPD. 3. As part of the Council’s response to climate change, new developments will be required to maximise the environmental risk

management benefits of Green Infrastructure where possible through: a. Flood risk management (utilising Sustainable Drainage Systems) b. Providing shade, cooling and carbon storage through the planting of appropriate tree species c. Contribution to a reduction in air and water pollution.

4. Manage and appropriately enhance existing Green Belt, open spaces, urban green corridors and woodlands (as shown on figure #) and continue to protect Greenlands (policy E.1 as designated in the Rossendale District Local Plan 1995). Where redevelopment takes place to enhance Green Infrastructure, the Council will seek to ensure that where necessary, opportunities are taken to address any issues of land instability or surface hazards resulting from historic mining activity.

5. Resist the fragmentation of the network by new development, and pursue the implementation of Natural England’s Access to Natural Greenspace Standards (ANGSt) over the lifetime of the Core Strategy.

6. Expect new developments to contribute to the provision of recreational green space, and to incorporate improvements to the quality of and access to existing Green Infrastructure in accordance with local circumstances.

7. Support the improvement of and access to the Public Rights of Way network (in particular the Pennine Bridleway, Rossendale Way, Irwell Sculpture Trail, Shoe Trail and National Cycle Routes) and other linear corridors in line with policy RLDF 9 and maximise the potential of Green Infrastructure to support sustainable and active tourism, in conjunction with the Adrenaline Gateway project.”

Selected supporting text Rossendale’s Green Infrastructure will be widely recognised as one of the Borough’s key strengths, and will attract and support sustainable development and regeneration whilst delivering wider social, economic, environmental, health and climate change adaptation and mitigation benefits. Green corridors will provide clean and safe routes linking areas of open space, and provide an alternative sustainable transport network throughout the Borough, with particular emphasis on accessibility and inclusivity for a wide variety of users. The Council will promote


158

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

greater awareness of the Green Infrastructure network through appropriate signage and publicity. Targets

1. Annual increase in satisfaction with the area. 2. Annual increase in adults participating in sport. 3. Annual reduction in CO2 emissions per capita. 4. Two thirds of rights of way network to be in ‘good’ condition by 2016; 80% by the end of the plan period. 5. Achieve 5 Green Flag awards for parks and green spaces in the Borough over the plan period.

17. Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Landscape

• Policy18: Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Landscape Conservation

Policy 18: Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Landscape Conservation “The Council will seek to avoid any harmful impacts of development on all aspects of Rossendale’s natural environment – including its biodiversity, geodiversity and landscape assets, including priority habitats and species and statutory designated sites. Current and future biodiversity and geodiversity assets will be given full and appropriate protection, and enhanced where possible. Development which would affect a species or habitat protected by law will not be permitted unless it can be demonstrated that:

a) There is no adverse impact on the species and/or habitats concerned; b) Alternative provision is effective in maintaining the affected species and/or habitats.

The Council will expect any development proposals to: 1. Safeguard and enhance landscape character, in accordance with the landscape character assessment in the Julie Martin

Associates (2010) study29. 2. Conserve and enhance biodiversity, and avoid any negative effects on strategic wildlife corridors, ecological networks and

habitats - including on previously developed land. 3. Conserve and enhance statutory and local sites of biodiversity, geological and geomorphological importance and interest. 4. Ensure that watercourses (and groundwater flows) are protected from encroachment and adverse impacts, and that water

quality is maintained or improved (including during the construction process) in line with the Water Framework Directive (WFD). Where appropriate, the Council will seek the enhancement and restoration of modified watercourses.

5. Ensure that air pollution emissions are minimised. 6. Avoid any loss of trees, woodland, hedgerows and other types of foliage and flora, and ensure that where necessary,

developments make provision for new and replacement planting.

29 Julie Martin Associates (2010) Landscape Capacity Study for Wind Energy Developments in the South Pennines


159

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

7. Promote sustainable use (including for recreation, tourism and leisure) of the natural environment where it does not prejudice the future of the landscape or other environmental assets.

8. Take opportunities to create features of biodiversity value including within new developments, where practicable. Where negative effects on biodiversity, geodiversity or landscape character are unavoidable, suitable measures will be required to mitigate any negative impacts. The Council will require that full compensatory provision is made where mitigation is not possible.”

Selected Supporting Text Rossendale’s natural assets are considerable and make a major contribution to the Borough in terms of their cultural value; their significance for providing a local identity to Rossendale; their value for tourism; and their general contribution to the quality of life. The Council will seek to conserve and enhance the diverse range of key habitats, landscapes and other assets which make up Rossendale’s natural environment, namely:

• The open countryside, moorlands and woodlands • The Green Belt • Biological Heritage Sites • Priority Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) Habitats • Green spaces, green corridors and woodlands within Rossendale’s urban areas • Local air and water quality • Land of recreational and amenity value • 7 Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological Sites (RIGS) • 52 Biological Heritage Sites (BHS)

Rossendale’s statutory designated sites include:

• Healey Dell Local Nature Reserve (LNR) • 3 Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) at Lower Red Lees Pasture, Lee Quarry and Hodge Clough

New development has the potential to contribute towards delivering a step change increase in biodiversity resources through sustainable design, location and the creation or restoration of priority habitats. The Council will seek to secure this increase in biodiversity in line with Lancashire BAP targets.


160

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

In line with national policy (PPS 9 – Biodiversity and Geological Conservation), the Council will expect that proposals maximise the potential for incorporating beneficial biodiversity and geological features as part of good design in and around developments – and will use planning obligations where necessary to secure such inclusions.

18. Climate Change and Renewable Energy

• Policy 19: Climate Change and Renewable Energy

Policy 19: Climate Change and Renewable Energy “Renewable and low carbon power (all types) and heating will meet at least 25% of the energy needs of the Borough by 2025. The Council will promote mitigation of climate change by:

1. Locating new development in sustainable, accessible locations which minimise the need for travel and length of journeys, in line with policy 1.

2. Requiring that new developments adopt energy-efficient. water-efficient and low carbon designs and layouts which meet or exceed the most up to date relevant national and regional standards. The Council will also maximise opportunities for increasing energy efficiency in existing buildings.

3. Requiring that natural passive heating and cooling systems are incorporated into new developments where appropriate. 4. Conserving and enhancing the Borough’s peatlands. 5. Expecting new developments to provide tree planting on site, or where this is not appropriate to make contributions towards

tree planting elsewhere through planning obligations. The Council will promote adaptation to climate change by:

1. Securing planning obligations for energy infrastructure and climate change adaptation measures. 2. New development should not be located in areas considered to be at a high risk of flooding in accordance with the

Rossendale Borough Council SFRA. Where development cannot be accommodated in areas of low flood risk and this is demonstrated to the Council, it will only be acceptable where appropriate mitigation is undertaken and demonstrated that the development is not at an unacceptable risk of flooding and will not increase flood risk elsewhere.

3. Expecting new developments to implement Sustainable Drainage Systems (SUDS) - such as incorporating permeable paving, swales, soakaways and conserving floodplains where appropriate, and minimise the use of impermeable surfacing in order to slow down the passage of rainwater into waterways and contribute to flood prevention.

4. Requiring that new developments incorporate water saving and recycling measures where possible to minimise water usage. All types of renewable and low carbon energy generation proposals (e.g. solar photovoltaic, hydro electric, biomass, solar thermal, ground source heat, etc) will be given positive consideration provided that they can demonstrate that:


161

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

a) They do not have a significant visual, noise, odour or other impact on local residents and sensitive users. b) They do not adversely impact key land resources, areas of ecological, geological or geomorphological value, cultural heritage

or biodiversity assets. c) They do not have a significant impact (either alone or cumulatively) on the character and value of the natural or urban

landscape. d) Their contribution to carbon emissions reduction and other community benefits outweigh other considerations.

Proposals for wind energy developments will also be assessed against policy RLDF20.” Selected Supporting Text Renewable and low carbon energy has the potential to provide secure, green, locally generated electricity and heat which can either provide on-site power to developments or can be exported to the national grid for wider distribution. Energy efficiency measures and carbon neutral building design also have a major contribution to make towards sustainable development, and will be actively encouraged by the Council. Rossendale’s topography makes it suitable for a range of renewable and low carbon energy generation technologies; the sensitive and appropriate implementation of which the Council will support in order to facilitate the transition to a low-carbon future. When assessing applications, the Council will not look upon a small potential energy output capacity as grounds for rejecting proposals, but will expect that a careful consideration of scale, location, design and other measures has been made, along with a demonstration of any environmental, economic and social benefits. The Council will seek to conserve and enhance the Borough’s peatlands, which act as an important carbon sequestration resource – effectively reducing levels of atmospheric CO2. Rossendale currently has the highest level of domestic CO² emissions of all Lancashire authorities (source: DEFRA 2006). A significant number of households, particularly those living in terraced stock in the east of the Borough, suffer from fuel poverty primarily due to poor insulation. Proposals that improve the energy efficiency of the existing building stock will be encouraged. Building Regulations, the Code for Sustainable Homes, BREEAM and Building for Life assessments all promote ever increasing levels of energy efficiency in new development. The Council will wherever economically viable encourage development that exceeds current minimum standards including in upgrades of existing stock. Renewable Electricity and Heat Generation Targets Rossendale Borough Council participated in a sub-regional study led by Pendle Borough Council examining the potential for renewable power generation in the Southern Pennines. The study considered the viability of different forms of energy generation, identified possible constraints and set out suitable areas for development. The study also identified targets for different technologies at district level, which have been inserted in the tables below. The Council will consider developing a future LDD on renewable energy provision and energy efficiency based on the findings of this Study and other related work.


162

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Type of Renewable Electricity Generation Technology

Total Pragmatic Generation Capacity (MW)

% Contribution of Technology

Commercial Wind 50.56 93.15 Small Scale Wind 0.57 1.05 Solar PV 1.84 3.39 Hydropower 0.64 1.18 Anaerobic Digestion 0.24 0.44 Other 0.43 0.79 Waste Wood 0.64 2.97 Anaerobic Digestion 0.08 0.37 Woodfuel 0.31 1.44 Solar Thermal Energy 4.50 20.90 Ground Source Heating 16.00 74.31

Targets

1. 100% of all residential developments achieving current national standard Code for Sustainable Homes level. 2. 100% of non-residential developments achieving current national standard for sustainable design of non-residential

developments. 3. 10% of residential developments exceeding part(s) of the current national standard for the Code for Sustainable Homes, where

circumstances and viability allow. 4. Annual increase in the number of renewable energy schemes.

19. Wind Energy

• Policy 20: Wind Energy

Policy 20: Wind Energy “Wind energy proposals and provision, including ancillary equipment and access roads, will be given positive consideration subject to the following criteria:

• They do not have a significant impact, alone or cumulatively, on landscape character and value, including urban areas and the wider South Pennine landscape based on the most up to date studies and assessments.

• They do not have a significant visual, noise or “flicker” impact on local residents and sensitive users; • They do not adversely impact areas of ecological value or fragment the migration routes of protected bird species • The integrity of areas of deep peat is not adversely affected , including by dissection for access roads and water quality and

colour is protected • Impacts on the historic environment are minimised • The electromagnetic impacts on aviation navigation systems and “line of sight” communications are adequately addressed • Community benefits, in particular contributions to energy efficiency measures, would outweigh other considerations


163

Component/ Policy

Policy Content

Developers will be expected to provide evidence to support their proposals including Landscape, Visual and Environmental Assessments and that any impacts can be satisfactorily mitigated where negative impacts cannot be removed solely through site selection.” Selected Supporting Text Rossendale has a significant wind resource. Scout Moor is the largest onshore wind farm in England. A comprehensive South Pennine study has been undertaken (Julie Martin Associates 2010) to create an objective method for analysing the local and cross-border landscape impacts of wind energy and will form the basis for consideration of the landscape impacts of applications. Issues to be considered include scale, effects on skylines, landscape condition, wildness and tranquillity and amenity value. It will also contribute towards assessment of the impact of proposals on historic buildings and townscapes. The document will contribute towards a future SPD on renewable energy. Noise from rotating turbines and light reflecting from the blades, known as “flicker effect” can have an impact on nearby residents as well as affecting other parties such as horse riders. The latter is of particular significance in areas close to the Pennine Bridleway. Ecological impacts can include effects on migrating birds though this can usually be mitigated by good design. Construction of turbine masts in deep peat can also adversely impact water quality with the disturbed peat leaching and causing discolouration. Disturbing peat deposits also releases stored carbon, reducing the overall positive CO2 benefits. This can occur both by construction of turbine foundations and by disturbance of blanket bog to create access roads. The Local Authority will expect developers of turbines over 25 metre base to tip height to consider and if necessary mitigate any impact on aircraft navigation and radiation systems. Developers will be expected to apply latest good practice on environmental impact assessment. Negative effects of wind energy development can be compensated by ensuring that the community benefits from the development of wind farms in its area. The Council will seek to negotiate appropriate local agreements using guidance contained in the document “Delivering community benefits from wind energy development: A Toolkit” (Renewables Advisory Board July 2009). The value of community benefits should be clear and measurable to be considered as a material consideration and should where possible demonstrate public engagement and support. Given the low energy efficiency of much of the older terraced housing stock a particular focus will be on establishing a fund to increase energy performance and reduce carbon emissions. Indicators: 1. Percentage of commercial wind farm applications granted planning permission contrary to policy. 2. MW of installed generating capacity 3. Number of community benefit agreements negotiated


164

Assessment Results: Strategy Components (1-6) Component 1: Strategy for Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth

• AVP1: Strategy for Whitworth, Facit and Shawforth

8.9 The policy has been developed in response to the findings of an employment land study - this has resulted in a commitment to releasing redundant employment sites for new uses, whilst pursuing employment development more closely aligned to the strengths of the locale – this will have benefits against the social and economic SA Objectives. The policy aims to consolidate development within Whitworth centre and includes a commitment to maintaining current Greenbelt and urban boundaries through the re-use of previously developed land, offering potential to protect the surrounding countryside from development pressure, with subsequent benefits for the environmental SA Objectives. The policy includes general reference to the improvement of access to 'key services', focusing on the provision of improved pedestrian and cycle routes and public transport, which will have benefits for social SA Objectives. The policy also aims to enhance access to surrounding countryside for leisure and recreational pursuits - this may introduce human activity and associated disturbance to new parts of the countryside and will require careful management.

8.10 Significant positive effects are predicted for the strategy component against most of the SA Objectives, with the exception of SA Objective 4 (adapting to a changing climate- minor positive) and Objective 8 (air, noise and light pollution- minor negative).

8.11 No significant negative effects are predicted from the assessment of this policy.

Recommendations

8.12 No specific recommendations are suggested for this policy component.

Component 2: Strategy for Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir

• AVP 2: Strategy for Bacup, Stacksteads, Britannia and Weir

8.13 The policy includes reference to actively supporting the conservation and enhancement of the distinct local heritage and investing in the development of tourism. The policy supports delivery of the Bacup Regeneration Initiative. Taken together, these will help to protect and re-invigorate the historic environment and use this as a basis for new development. The policy aims to consolidate development within existing settlement boundaries, offering potential to protect the surrounding countryside from development pressure. In addition, the locational strategy included within the policy should help to encourage some development on previously developed land (PDL30) (Policy 1 indicates higher density development will be encouraged in Bacup). Notwithstanding this, the policy includes reference to the development of infill sites and substantial new housing as part of the HMR - this is likely to involve some Greenfield development. In focusing development on locations with established and expanding services and

30 ‘Previously-developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure.’ The definition includes defence buildings, but excludes: – Land that is or has been occupied by agricultural or forestry buildings. – Land that has been developed for minerals extraction or waste disposal by landfill purposes where provision for restoration has been made through development control procedures. – Land in built-up areas such as private residential gardens, parks, recreation grounds and allotments, which, although it may feature paths, pavilions and other buildings, has not been previously developed. – Land that was previously-developed but where the remains of the permanent structure or fixed surface structure have blended into the landscape in the process of time (to the extent that it can reasonably be considered as part of the natural surroundings). CLG June 2010, PPS3: Housing , http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/planningandbuilding/pdf/planningpolicystatement3.pdf


165

facilities, this approach offers potential to enhance accessibility. Specific reference is made to the promotion of Futures Park as a focus for education and skills development, supported by small scale offices. Employment opportunities are also supported.

8.14 Significant positive effects are predicted against most of the SA objectives for this policy, including SA objectives: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 5 (flood risk); 7 (land quality); 9 (waste); 10 (affordable housing); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport). All other predicted effects were minor.


Recommendations


Component 3: Strategy for Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water

• AVP 3: Strategy for Waterfoot, Cowpe, Lumb and Water

8.17 The policy aims to develop Waterfoot as a local centre for small businesses and independent shops, including the redevelopment of the Victoria Arcade. The policy also supports the redevelopment of vacant and underused sites, seeking to deliver an enhanced local centre and improved public realm. The policy, amongst other things, indicates an aspiration to offer housing stock that encourages people to stay in the strategy area. In focusing development on locations with established and expanding services and facilities, this approach offers potential to enhance accessibility. The policy incorporates specific reference to the development of a range of recreational pursuits and complementary development that has the potential to significantly enhance the local tourism product, including the redevelopment of much of the heritage within Waterfoot. The policy also aims to enhance access to surrounding countryside for leisure and recreational pursuits in the context of the Adrenaline Gateway - this may introduce human activity and associated disturbance to new parts of the countryside and will require careful management.

8.18 Significant positive effects were predicted to arise as a result of this policy for the assessments against SA objectives: 1 (landscape and heritage); 5 (flood risk); 9 (waste); 10 (affordable housing); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport). No significant negative effects were predicted through the assessment of this policy against the SA objectives. One minor negative effect was predicted against SA Objective 8 (air, noise and light pollution).


Recommendations


Component 4: Strategy for Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough

• AVP 4: Strategy for Rawtenstall, Crawshawbooth, Goodshaw and Loveclough

• Policy 12: The Valley Centre, Rawtenstall

8.21 The policy includes reference to actively supporting the conservation and enhancement of the distinct local heritage, including through the redevelopment of the Valley Centre and creation of new public realm that reflects the Conservation Area context. The policy also includes a


166

commitment to enhancing the Conservation Areas of Goodshawfold and Loveclough, as well as exploring the creation of a new Conservation Area in Crawshawbooth. Taken together, these will help to protect and re-invigorate the historic environment and use this as a basis for new development. The policy includes reference to the development of vacant and underused sites, as well as redevelopment (e.g. Valley Centre and the Rossendale Hospital Site) all of which will assist in avoiding the loss of Greenfield sites to development. However, the housing growth elements of the strategy imply that there may be some (but no major) Greenfield development and general development of rural areas for recreational pursuits.

8.22 The policy, amongst other things, indicates that residential development will be focused on Rawtenstall, which represents the most accessible location in the strategy area. Policies 2, 3 and 4 should work in a complementary manner to deliver sufficient housing sites; the strategy area is identified as contributing to housing needs, with a target of 20% affordable housing provision on brownfield sites of over 15 dwellings; and 30% on greenfield sites over 8 dwellings.

8.23 The policy includes the improvement of public transport provision and infrastructure, including the redevelopment of the bus station and enhancement of rail services to provide a commuter route to Manchester. In addition, the policy supports improved accessibility to and from the area and pedestrian and cycle connections in support of visitor and leisure attractions. The policy includes several commitments to the delivery of enhanced opportunities for active lifestyles, including development of Ski Rossendale, Marl Pits Leisure Centre and sustainable transport. The quality of the Town Centre and public realm will be enhanced through redevelopment.

8.24 Significant positive effects are predicted against most of the SA objectives, including: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 5 (flood risk); 6 (energy use and renewable energy); 7 (land quality); 10 (affordable housing); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport). All other predicted effects were minor.


Recommendations


Component 5: Strategy for South-West Rossendale • AVP 5: Strategy for South-West Rossendale

8.27 The policy includes reference to actively supporting the conservation and enhancement of the distinct local heritage, including through the conservation area designations at Irwell Vale and Lumb, Chatterton and Stubbins. Taken together, these will help to protect and re-invigorate the historic environment and use this as a basis for new development.

8.28 The policy, amongst other things, indicates that limited residential development will be delivered on infill sites and PDL in Edenfield, Ewood Bridge and Stubbins with specific reference made to meeting affordable housing needs. These established centres represent the most accessible locations in the strategy area. Helmshore will be the focus of larger housing schemes including improvements to local community facilities and infrastructure. However, the housing and employment growth elements of the strategy imply that there may be some Greenfield development and general development of rural areas for recreational pursuits.

8.29 The policy includes the improvement of public transport provision and infrastructure, including the potential development of a Park and Ride to support the Manchester to Rawtenstall commuter line. In addition, the policy supports improved accessibility to and from the area and pedestrian and cycle connections in support of visitor and leisure attractions, including the development of recreational routes as part of the tourism product. The policy also aims to enhance access to surrounding countryside for leisure and recreational pursuits including through the development


167

of Green Infrastructure for a combination of biodiversity enhancement and improved connectivity - this may introduce human activity and associated disturbance to new parts of the countryside and will require careful management.

8.30 Significant positive effects are predicted for the strategy against most of the SA objectives, including: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 5 (flood risk); 7 (land quality); 10 (affordable housing); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport). All other predicted effects were minor.


Recommendations


Component 6: Strategy for Haslingden and Rising Bridge • AVP 6: Strategy for Haslingden and Rising Bridge

8.33 The policy includes reference to actively supporting the conservation and enhancement of the distinct local heritage, focusing on improvements to Haslingden Town Centre, to be delivered in the context of the conservation area designation. The policy also supports the production of a vacant buildings strategy for Deardengate, Haslingden town centre. Taken together, these will help to protect and re-invigorate the historic environment and use this as a basis for new development.

8.34 The policy has been developed in response to the findings of an employment land study - this has resulted in a commitment to Carrs and Broadway Industrial Estates as locations for the consolidation of B1, B2 and B8 uses, as well as the identification of a Business Hub at Rising Bridge for B1 uses. The town centres of Deardengate and Haslingden will also be subject to investment in redevelopment and enhancement, likely to improve the business environment and local image over time. The policy includes general reference to the improvement of public transport provision and infrastructure, accessibility to and from the town centre and established employment locations. Reference is also made to upgrading sports, leisure and the proportion of A1 and A2 uses within the town centre, thus improving the range and quality of services in accessible locations.

8.35 Significant positive effects are predicted for the strategy against most of the SA objectives, including: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 5 (flood risk); 7 (land quality); 10 (affordable housing); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport). All other predicted effects were minor.


Recommendations



168

Assessment Results: Topic-based Components Component 7: Sustainable Development Principles

• Policy 1: General Development Locations and Principals

• Policy 24: Planning Application Considerations

8.38 Policy 1 seeks to ensure that any changes to the urban boundary do not lead to the amalgamation of settlements and do not have negative effects on biological, geological assets and landscape character or local views. Visual quality is also a key consideration in Policy 24. The overall development approach (Policy 1) promotes the use of locally distinctive materials to enhance local character and heritage of Rossendale. Policy 24 aims to ensure that development is compatible with its surroundings and contributes to local distinctiveness. The provision of Green Infrastructure (GI), public spaces and public art is beneficial for the landscape and townscape quality.

8.39 Policy 24 seeks that development has considered both the on and off site effects of development in terms of climate change. The requirement for sustainable design standards and green infrastructure within the policy is likely to enable the Borough to be more adaptable to climate change over time, as more development becomes in conformity with these standards. The requirement for green infrastructure and walking, cycling and public transport access, as well as the focus on development in urban areas and promoting the co-location of services and facilities (Policy 1), may also help reduce the need to travel by private car and improve air quality in the medium to long term. The incorporation of public spaces and secured by design standards and to protect the amenity of the area. These measures should have positive effects on public health through stimulating outdoor activities and community interaction, improving natural surveillance, safety standards and a subsequent reduction in the fear of crime.

8.40 Policy 24 also seeks that development proposals identify and adequately address issues of contamination or land stability, incorporating land reclamation schemes. Effects are likely to be most significant in the short to medium term, while brownfield sites are still available. Significant positive effects are likely in the long term, through an improvement in land quality resulting from the remediation of contaminated sites.

8.41 Overall, the policies that comprise the component were predicted as likely to have a range of positive effects on the sustainability objectives, most of which were significant. Significant positive effects were predicted for the following objectives: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 3 (water resources); 4 (adaptation to climate change); 5 (flood risk); 6 (energy efficiency and generation); 7 (land quality); 8 (air quality); 9 (use of natural resources); 10 (affordable housing); 12 (health and wellbeing); and 17 (sustainable transport).

Recommendations


Component 8: Housing • Policy 2: Meeting Rossendale’s Housing Requirement

• Policy 3: Distribution of Additional Housing

• Policy 4: Affordable and Supported Housing

8.43 Policy 2 requires prioritisation of the development of brownfield land and allows greenfield development only under particular circumstances, e.g. where it is for 100% affordable housing. Housing development will be delivered to high design standards in accordance with other relevant Core Strategy policies, ensuring resource efficiency. Policy 4 seeks to provide a range of affordable and supported housing to reflect local needs. Effects may be more prominent over


169

time as proportions of affordable housing are delivered through the provision of housing of all types. At least 65% of housing provision will be on previously developed sites, with specific local higher and lower targets based on the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA)31. This should help protect soil resources in the Borough. Further benefits, especially in the shorter term, should be delivered through the re-use and conversion of buildings for housing, and encouraging higher density development in sustainable locations.

8.44 The policies were generally assessed as performing well against the majority of the SA objectives and, in particular, deliver significant positive effects against the following sustainability objectives: 1 (landscape and heritage); 7 (land quality); 9 (use of natural resources); 10 (affordable housing); 11 (access to services and facilities); 12 (health and wellbeing); 16 (vitality and viability of town and village centres) and 17 (sustainable transport).

8.45 One significant negative effect was predicted against SA objective 8 (air quality, noise and light pollution). Encouraging higher density development in locations that are well served by public transport could reduce the potential effect from traffic that may result from new development. However, it is likely that overall an increase in traffic will result from the development of housing, which could have a negative effect on air, noise and light pollution.

Recommendations


Component 9: Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

• Policy 5: Meeting the Needs of Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople

8.47 The policy proposes that sites are located in places that have good access to the road network and are within easy reach of schools, shops, and other facilities. The supporting text provides greater clarity on this matter, stating specifically that sites are within 1 mile of at least two of the following: shops, school, community facilities, GP. Sites should be within 400m of a bus route. Sites should also be in proximity to open space. Definition of specific sites also presents opportunities to ensure that access to key services and facilities can be delivered. This could have benefits against both social objectives relating to the health and wellbeing of the gypsy traveller community, but also on environmental objectives seeking to improve air quality and encourage travel by sustainable modes including walking and cycling.

8.48 Providing authorised sites for Gypsies, Travellers and Travelling Showpeople is likely to have benefits on the landscape through a reduction in the use of the countryside for unauthorised pitches. The policy states that all sites should be well landscaped, and take into account the impact on local residents including the effects of noise and light pollution.

8.49 The policy is predicted to create significant positive effects against 6 of the SA objectives, which are: 4 (adaptation to climate change); 10 (affordable housing); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills) and 17 (sustainable transport).


Recommendations


Component 10: Retail and Town Centre • Policy 11: Retail and other Town Centre Uses

31 http://www.rossendale.gov.uk/site/scripts/documents_info.php?documentID=524&pageNumber=2


170

• Policy 13: Protecting Key Local Retail and other Services

8.52 Policy 11 seeks that retail development as well as offices, leisure, arts, cultural and tourist facilities will be focused in the town and local centres. This could lead to an increase in the quantity of provision in the Borough, as well as improve access to these services and facilities for more people through locating provision in areas where public transport accessibility will be more viable. Improving the provision of local services and facilities in proximity to communities could increase the proportion of people walking or cycling to centres, which could increase community mixing and cohesion and physical activity. This may, in turn, deliver subsequent benefits for mental health as well as physical health through informal physical activity and reduced air pollution through a reduction in traffic.

8.53 Conservation Area Appraisals and Management Plans will be prepared for conservation areas that include some of the centres covered by this policy. Conservation Areas that may be affected include: Rawtenstall, Bacup and Whitworth Square. This could help to ensure that the design of new development enhances areas of importance for heritage. As a complement, economic regeneration could have a beneficial effect on heritage assets through increased investment (i.e. through bringing buildings back into use). Additional employment opportunities within accessible centres are likely to provide greater employment choices for more people, which could improve local skills levels over time.

8.54 Significant positive effects have been predicted for the component policies against the SA objectives: 1 (heritage and landscape); 7 (land quality); 8 (air, noise and light quality); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport).

8.55 One significant negative effect was predicted against SA Objective 6, which seeks to minimise the requirement for energy use, promote efficient energy use and increase the use of energy from renewable resources. The assessment was based on an increase in development being likely to increase the need for energy, especially in the short term. However, Policies 23, 24 and national guidance will ensure that new development is built to high standards of sustainable design, that will lead to reduced operational energy usage over time.

Recommendations


Component 11: Sustainable Communities • Policy 7: Social Infrastructure

• Policy 22: Planning Contributions

• Policy 23: Promoting High Quality Design and Spaces

8.57 Policy 23 seeks that all new development contributes positively to local identity and heritage in terms of scale, density, layout, materials and access. The 'highest standard' of design is required, to respect and respond to local context distinctiveness and character. This and other requirements, such as the need to maintain the relationship between the urban areas and the countryside, will ensure that new development has a positive effect on this Objective, particularly in the medium to longer term as development proposals are built. Policy 7 seeks that social infrastructure such as community halls and open space will be resisted. This could help to contribute to local distinctiveness in settlements. Resisting the loss of community facilities could help to maintain the cultural value of settlements in the Borough.

8.58 Policy 23 specifically refers to the need for design to facilitate adaptation to climate change through the use of national design guidance such as the CfSH and BREEAM. Supporting text reference the use of GI, including green roofs, which have significant potential to enable buildings


171

to adapt to the effects of climate change. Added to requirements for spatial solutions such as through Policy 7 which seeks to retain open space, and Policy 22, which seeks to increase contributions to GI, significant benefits could be achieved in the medium to long term as development proposals are realised.

8.59 Policy 7 seeks to take a positive approach to the provision of community facilities. Policy 22 may lead to an increase in countryside access, affordable housing, medical facilities and sporting and recreational facilities, through a combination of contributions and CIL, which could have beneficial effects on levels of health and wellbeing. Policy 23 seeks that the design of public spaces encourages natural surveillance. This could reduce crime and the fear of crime, contributing to improvements in mental wellbeing.

8.60 Ensuring that viable alternatives for community facilities that may be lost are available within 15 minutes by non car travel means, will ensure that the need to travel is not increased through the loss of facilities under Policy 7. Further, the policy states that the provision of new social infrastructure will be viewed positively, especially where this creates options for a variety of users and user groups and reduces the need to travel. Policy 22 will seek that transport facilities are provided through developer contributions, which could encompass sustainable modes.

8.61 Overall the effects of the policies in the component are predicted to be positive, with a range of significant positive effects predicted against SA objectives: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 4 (adaptation to climate change); 5 (flood risk); 6 (energy efficiency and generation); 7 (land quality); 9 (use of natural resources); 10 (affordable housing); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); and 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport).

8.62 No negative effects are predicted from the assessment of this component.

Recommendations


Component 12: Transport and Accessibility • Policy 8: Transport proposals including Rawtenstall-Manchester Railway link

• Policy 9: Accessibility

8.64 The improvement in public transport provision, particularly by rail to Manchester, will have multiple benefits for the local and sub regional economy through increased accessibility to employment opportunities for a greater proportion of the population. As outlined in the supporting text, the development of the bus station will be part of the broader regeneration of Rawtenstall town centre. Cumulative benefits of this, coupled with other initiatives could arise, with trickle down effects being felt across the Borough. The continued provision of parking alongside improvements both to public transport provision, accessibility as well as improvements to reduce road congestion is likely to have benefits on the local economy.

8.65 Policy 9 seeks that new development is located close to public transport corridors or within 400m of a bus stop with regular services and states that the Transport User Hierarchy is to form the basis of all considerations. This could improve the accessibility of services and facilities for new communities in the Borough. Improving accessibility to services and facilities through an improvement in public transport facilities could enhance mental wellbeing through increased community interaction. The improved accessibility by all modes to the local and town centres, particularly Rawtenstall, is likely to improve the vitality and viability of these areas by encouraging an increase in users/visitors. Improved physical wellbeing could arise through improved access to health facilities and new or improved walking and cycling routes, encouraging more active lifestyles. Should modal shift be effective, then there is potential for a long term improvement in


172

health through better air quality resulting from an overall decrease in traffic and increase in sequestration through GI.

8.66 Policy 8 seeks to improve the provision of sustainable transport facilities, with a focus on Rawtenstall. This could lead to an inequitable distribution of opportunities. The provision of measures to encourage use of footpaths, cycleways and bridleways for the mobility impaired (Policy 9) will help to improve accessibility for a wider range of people. Benefits are likely to be most prominent in the long term, as new development leads to communities with greater opportunities. Accessibility planning will be undertaken using computer software, as explained in the supporting text. This will help to improve the identification of community needs, which could lead to significant long term benefits.

8.67 The majority of assessments against the SA objectives were predicted to be significantly positive. The SA objectives against which significant positive effects were predicted are: 2 (biodiversity); 3 (water quality and quantity); 4 (adapting to climate change); 5 (flood risk); 6 (energy use and generation); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport). All other effects predicted were minor positive.

8.68 No significant negative effects are predicted from the assessment of this component.

Recommendations


Component 13: Tourism • RLDF 14: Tourism

• RLDF 15: Overnight Visitor Accommodation

8.70 The policies seek to provide a framework to enable the growth of the leisure and tourism offer in the Borough. This is likely to enable enhanced economic growth as the offer will be mainly based on existing assets and utilising existing resources (such as the reuse of existing buildings to provide tourism accommodation), creating a low risk strategy. The development of local skills will help to ensure that the offer is viable and self-sustaining. Encouraging an increase in visitors to the Borough is likely to increase the vitality and viability of the town, district and local centres, particularly where assets will be developed in their proximity. This is likely to be the case for the towns in the east of the Borough.

8.71 The policies in the component seek to support the development of the leisure, cultural and tourism industry. The elements of the policies, along with the other policies in the plan that seek to conserve and enhance the built and natural environment and increase the development of traditional skills in the region, will help to improve the benefits against this Objective in the long term.

8.72 Policy 14 seeks to improve accessibility by public transport, as well as increase the provision for cyclists which may create benefits against this objective. Policy 15 requires that overnight visitor accommodation is accessible by a variety of modes and supporting facilities such as cycle storage is encouraged. This should work as a complement to the benefits that may be derived from policies 8 and 9. Improvements in the PROW network and the implementation of policies 8 and 9 may improve accessibility by sustainable modes to tourism facilities.

8.73 The majority of effects predicted against the policies in this component are significantly positive. This includes the assessments against SA objectives: 1 (heritage and landscape); 2 (biodiversity); 4 (adapting to climate change); 5 (flood risk); 9 (natural resources and waste); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport).


173

8.74 All other effects are predicted to be minor, with the exception of the prediction of one significant negative effect. This was predicted against SA Objective 8 (noise, light and air pollution). An increase in tourism is likely to lead to an increase in overall traffic, particularly as the mountain biking facility attracts visitors from across the north-west. This could have negative effects on air, noise and light pollution in the Borough. This effect will increase in the medium to long term, as increasing numbers of development proposals are realised. However, Policy 14 seeks to improve accessibility by public transport, as well as increase the provision for cyclists which may reduce some of the significance of this effect.

8.75 Recommendations to improve the performance towards the achievement of the SA objectives are made below.

Recommendations

Policy 14

1. Policy 14 states that 'Key biodiversity sites and landscape assets will be conserved and where possible enhanced alongside the development of the local tourist industry - in particular within the designated West Pennine Moors area and the Moorland of the South Pennines.' The policy, perhaps through the reasoned justification, should outline how this will be achieved. This should include reference to features and assets of importance.

2. The potential conflicts between the need for provision of renewable energy in the countryside and overall tourism aspirations could be explored in a future renewable energy SPD. Policy outcomes should ensure that the achievement of potential in both aspects is possible.

3. With regards to the effects from tourism on the transport network, it is suggested that ‘minimise’ might be a more appropriate word than ‘mitigate’, as some negative effects from an increased in traffic are likely. Approaches to the regulation of traffic from across the region should be coordinated with other local authorities and through the LTP to ensure a holistic approach to improving outcomes.

Component 14: Skills, Employment and Economy

• Policy 6: Training and Skills

• Policy10: Provision for Employment

• Policy 21: Supporting the Rural Economy and its Communities

8.76 The policies seek to encourage economic growth within the Borough. Significant positive effects are likely due to the focus on the development of skills and encouragement of sustainable rural communities, as well as the encouragement of industries that are predicted to grow in the future. The emphasis of policies in the Plan on the development of tourism has, in particular, potential to deliver benefits at the sub-regional level.

8.77 Policy 6 seeks to improve and provide new opportunities for training and skills development through improved access to opportunities and encouraging training through employment. Specific projects such as the major new facility near Bacup will seek to address a current gap in the provision of educational opportunities in the Borough, providing vocational training for 14-21 year olds. Specific training opportunities that are encouraged in particular are specified in the policies, which will help to underpin the overall strategy for development in Rossendale. Additionally, increases in employment through policies 10 and 21 may enable skills levels to increase over time as projects are delivered and training undertaken.

8.78 Significant positive effects are predicted against SA objectives: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 6 (energy use and generation); 7 (land quality); 11 (accessibility);


174

12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport).

8.79 One significant negative effect is predicted against SA Objective 8 (noise, light and air quality). An increase in employment is likely to lead to an increase in traffic overall, although the policies seek to reduce the need to travel through providing employment within established communities across the Borough. This could minimise negative effects in the longer term. Medium term effects are likely to be most significant, as development proposals are realised. An intensification of development, especially in the settlements, could reduce the opportunity for mitigation of air, noise and light pollution as less space may be available for the implementation of features such as GI. Policies 17 and 18 make reference to air quality in respect of green infrastructure and biodiversity. Policies 8 and 9 also make reference to the link between sustainable transport and enhanced air quality. This could reduce the significance of effects.

Recommendations

Policy 10

4. It is suggested that the policy requirement 'meet high energy standards' (Policy10) is unnecessary and not specific enough. Requirements of this kind are included in Policy 19 and so do not need to be repeated in this policy.

Component 15: Built Environment • Policy 16: Preserving and Enhancing Rossendale’s Built Environment

8.80 The policy seeks to protect the historic character and local distinctiveness of the plan area through a range of measures, which should provide significant benefits against this objective. Effects will be significant in the short term through protection measures, as well as in the medium to longer terms, through measures to conserve and enhance the historic environment. The policy is likely to lead to an increase in the attractiveness of the Borough, which may attract increased investment over time. Conservation-led regeneration schemes are also likely to provide economic benefits for the Borough. The cultural and tourism industry is likely to benefit significantly as a result of this policy, which will protect, conserve and enhance tourism resources and attractions. An improvement in the built and historic natural environment of the plan area could have positive effects on mental wellbeing through an increase in local distinctiveness and a sense of local community.

8.81 The policy is assessed as delivering a strong performance against all the spectrum of the SA objectives. Specifically significant positive effects ar predicted against the following SA objectives: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 7 (land quality); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); and 16 (town and village centres).


Recommendations


Component 16: Green Infrastructure • Policy 17: Rossendale’s Green Infrastructure

8.84 GI has the potential to enable the Borough to adapt to the predicted effects of the changing climate. Benefits arising from the policy implementation include adaptation to the increased risk of flooding, increasing carbon sink capacity and urban shading and cooling. The development of a GI network in the Borough is also likely to lead to an increase in green space, which will have


175

benefits for landscape and townscape character, contributing to a sense of place. Point 6 of the policy seeks to resist fragmentation of the green network, which should help important ecological species adapt to the changing climate in the long term through enabling better migration, dispersal and genetic exchange.

8.85 Adherence to Natural England's greenspace standards is likely to provide benefits, ensuring that open greenspace is within walking distances from residential areas within the lifetime of the Core Strategy. Other health benefits that are likely to occur may result from an increase in recreation space (through the requirement for contributions to its provision) and enhancement of the PROW network. Supporting text specifically seeks that green corridors provide clean and safe routes linking areas of open space, providing an alternative sustainable transport network with particular emphasis on accessibility and inclusivity for a wide variety of users. These are likely to result in increased physical activity, both formal and informal. Positive effects are also likely to arise from the adoption of more active life styles, as walking and cycling are promoted by this policy. All these measures will also stimulate community interaction and increase natural surveillance, leading to positive effects on wellbeing and reducing the fear of crime.

8.86 A reduction in air pollution through the sequestration potential of GI, is likely to have benefits for health as well. Significant beneficial effects are predicted against all but 3 of the sustainability objectives. The sustainability objectives against which significant positive effects are predicted are: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 3 (water resources); 4 (adaptation to climate change); 5 (flood risk); 6 (energy efficiency and generation); 7 (land quality); 8 (air quality); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 15 (leisure and tourism); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport).

8.87 Although no significant effects are predicted to arise as a result of the policy, a number of suggestions are made below to improve the potential of the plan to achieve sustainable development.

Recommendations

Policy 17

8.88 It is suggested that a number of improvements (see below) be made to the 'GI map' to facilitate the implementation of the policy. It is also recommended that a map is produced overlaying the GI network on an OS map. Additional more detailed maps for the key towns could be developed.

8.89 It is recommended that each point within the policy should provide a clear message, which is distinct from the other messages (e.g. point 6). This would improve the policy's clarity.

8.90 Other recommendations aiming to enhance positive effects associated with the implementation of the policy are made as follows:

• It is suggested that 'vegetation' be added to ‘tree species' under point 3b.

• The GI map could be further enhanced by demonstrating how the policy seeks to enhance linkages between the 'green' areas as shown. At present, the 'network' seems to consist of a series of spaces, many of which are not connected. The policy seeks to improve the PROW network, but this is not shown on the GI network map. This omission should be rectified. It was also suggested that RIGS and other designated sites be added to the map. Further, waterways in addition to waterbodies and the functional flood plain (EA Flood Zone 3b) could be shown on the map.

• Point 4c could be strengthened by including a reference to the reduction in noise and light pollution. This could be achieved through the provision of appropriate vegetation in sensitive locations.


176

Component 17: Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Landscape • RLDF18: Biodiversity, Geodiversity and Landscape Conservation

8.91 The intent of the policy is to protect and enhance biodiversity and habitats and well as sites protected for geological or geomorphological importance. The policy seeks to avoid any negative effects on the natural environment, including landscape assets. Landscape character will be safeguarded and enhanced, providing benefits. The policy specifically requires that watercourses are protected from encroachment and adverse impacts and that water quality is maintained or improved in line with the Water Framework Directive. The policy also requires that where possible the enhancement and restoration of modified watercourses should be sought. Ensuring that strategic wildlife corridors and networks are maintained will enable biodiversity to adapt to the effects of the changing climate.

8.92 Ensuring the enhancement of biodiversity in the Borough may have beneficial effects for air quality through pollutants' sequestration. A similar effect may be experienced for noise and light pollution by providing noise/light barrier and screening. Additionally, noise and light pollution may be prevented where it would have a negative effect on sensitive habitats, reducing overall pollution levels. The policy seeks that development that may affect protected habitats or species will need to minimise air pollution emissions which could lead to benefits over time.

8.93 The policy seeks the sustainable use of the natural environment, including for leisure, recreation and tourism. This could enable an increase in physical activity, with subsequent health benefits in the population over time.

8.94 This is a strong environmental policy, the implementation of which is also predicted to deliver benefits against a range of sustainability objectives, demonstrating the interconnectivity of all three sustainability dimensions. Significant beneficial effects are predicted as follows: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 3 (water resources); 4 (adaptation to climate change); 8 (air quality, noise and light pollution); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); and 15 (leisure and tourism).


Recommendations


Component 18: Climate Change and Renewable Energy • Policy 19: Climate Change and Renewable Energy

8.97 The policy seeks that development adapts to the effects of climate change through ensuring that detailed flood risk assessment is undertaken with appropriate measures implemented where necessary. The requirement for SUDS will also help reduce this effect. The policy seeks that renewable and low carbon energy will meet at least 25% of the energy needs of the Borough by 2025. The range of measures promoted through the policy is likely to enable a reduction in the use of energy across the Borough. Improving the potential of development to adapt to the effects of climate change will have beneficial effects for health, as it will enable people to live more comfortably and safely in an environment characterised by increased risk of flooding and higher temperature variations. Effects of the policy are most likely to be significant in the medium to long term.

8.98 Policy 19 is assessed as performing favourably against all but two of the SA objectives. Significant beneficial effects are predicted against: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 3 (water resources); 4 (adaptation to climate change); 5 (flood risk); 6 (energy efficiency and generation); 8 (air quality); 9 (use of natural resources); 10 (good quality,


177

affordable housing); 11 (accessibility); 12 (health and wellbeing); 13 (education and skills); 14 (economic growth); 16 (town and village centres); and 17 (sustainable transport).

8.99 No significant negative effects are predicted to arise as a result of the implementation of this policy. However, a minor recommendation is made below, to improve clarity in the CS.

Recommendations

Policy 19

• It is suggested that the title of the policy is changed to ‘Climate Change and Low and Zero Carbon Sources of Energy’ to reflect the phrasing changes elsewhere in the CS.

Component 19: Wind Energy • Policy 20: Wind Energy

8.100 The policy could enable the utilisation of the significant wind resource in the Borough to provide high levels of renewable energy. Further, the policy seeks to encourage contributions to energy efficiency measures, which could outweigh other considerations constraining opportunities to create new wind power 'stations'. Protecting peat resources will also enable carbon sink capacity within the resource to be retained.

8.101 The policy is predicted to have a significant positive effect against four of the SA objectives. Predicted significant positive effects are predicted against SA objectives: 1 (landscape and heritage); 2 (biodiversity and geodiversity); 3 (water quality and quantity); and 6 (energy use and generation). All other effects are predicted to be minor, with no significant negative effects predicted.

Recommendations

8.102 No specific recommendations are suggested for this policy component


178

Table 8.2 – Summary of Significance of Direct Effects of the Core Strategy Policies

SA Objective

Component

1: S

trat

egy

for W

hitw

orth

, Fac

it an

d Sh

awfo

rth

2: S

trat

egy

for B

acup

, Sta

cksh

eads

, B

ritan

nia

and

Wei

r 3:

Str

ateg

y fo

r Wat

erfo

ot, C

owpe

, Lu

mb

and

Wat

er

4: S

trat

egy

for R

awte

nsta

ll,

Cra

wsh

awbo

oth,

Goo

dsha

w a

nd

5: S

trat

egy

for S

outh

Wes

t R

osse

ndal

e

6: S

trat

egy

for H

aslin

gden

and

R

isin

g B

ridge

7:

Sus

tain

able

Dev

elop

men

t Pr

inci

ples

8:

Hou

sing

9: G

ypsi

es, T

rave

llers

and

Tr

avel

ling

Show

peop

le

10: R

etai

l and

Tow

n C

entr

e

11: S

usta

inab

le C

omm

uniti

es

12: T

rans

port

and

Acc

essi

bilit

y

13: T

ouris

m

14. S

kills

, Em

ploy

men

t and

Ec

onom

y 15

. Bui

lt En

viro

nmen

t

16. G

reen

Infr

astr

uctu

re

17. B

iodi

vers

ity, G

eodi

vers

ity a

nd

Land

scap

e

18. C

limat

e C

hang

e an

d R

enew

able

En

ergy

19

: Win

d En

ergy

1 To protect, enhance and manage places, landscapes and buildings of historic, cultural and archaeological value ++ ++ +++ +++ ++ ++ +++ ++ + ++ +++ + +++ ++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++

2 To protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity in Rossendale ++ ++ + ++ ++ ++ +++ + + + ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ ++

3 To protect and improve the quality of Rossendale’s waterways and to sustainably manage water resources ++ + + + + + +++ + + - + ++ + - + ++ +++ ++ ++

4 To promote adaptation to Rossendale’s changing climate + + + + ++ + ++ + ++ + ++ ++ ++ + + +++ ++ +++ 0

5 To reduce flood risk in Rossendale from rivers

++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + +/- +/- ++ ++ ++ +/- + +++ + +++ 0

6 To minimise the requirement for energy use, promote efficient energy use and increase the use of energy from renewable resources ++ + + ++ + + ++ + 0 -- +++ +++ + ++ + ++ 0 +++ +++


179

7 To protect and improve land quality in Rossendale ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ +++ + ++ ++ + + ++ ++ ++ + + 0

8 To protect and improve air quality and minimise noise and light pollution in Rossendale - - - - - - ++ -- - ++ + + -- -- + ++ ++ ++ -

9 To ensure the efficient use of natural resources and sustainable management of waste, minimise its production and increase re-use, recycling and recovery rates

++ ++ ++ + + + +++ ++ - - ++ + ++ +/- + 0 0 ++ 0

10 To improve access to a range of good quality, affordable and resource efficient housing that meets the needs of the community of Rossendale

++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ 0 ++ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ++ 0

11 To improve access to basic goods, services and amenities and equality of opportunity in Rossendale +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ ++ + ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ 0 ++ 0

12 To improve physical and mental health and well-being of people and reduce health inequalities in Rossendale ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++

+ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++

+ ++ +++ 0

13 To improve education, skills and qualifications in the Borough and provide opportunities for lifelong learning + ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + 0 ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++

+ ++ + 0 ++ +

14 To support a strong, diverse, vibrant and sustainable local economy to foster balanced economic growth ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + + + ++ ++ ++

+ +++

+++

+++ ++ + ++ 0

15 Support the development of the sustainable leisure, cultural and tourism industry ++

+ +++

+++

+++

+++ ++ + 0 0 ++ ++ ++ ++

+ ++ +++ ++ ++ + +

16 To maintain and enhance the vitality and viability of town and village centres in the Borough ++ ++ ++

+ +++ ++ ++ + ++ + ++ ++ ++

+ ++ ++ ++ ++ + ++ 0

17 To improve the choice and use of sustainable transport in Rossendale and reduce the need to travel ++ ++ ++ ++

+ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + +++ 0 ++ 0


180

Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects 8.103 The detailed assessment, the results of which are presented in Appendix H, was focused

primarily on direct effects. As required by the SEA Regulations, cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects have also been recorded and analysed during the appraisal.

8.104 Table 8.3 shows the results of this analysis, highlighting those cumulative, synergistic and indirect effects considered to be the most prominent.


181

Table 8.3 - Summary of Cumulative, Synergistic and Indirect Effects

Policy Component

Effects (positive: green; negative: red; mixture of positive and

negative: yellow)

Causes Significance

1-18 Synergistic, cumulative and indirect effects on tackling social and geographical exclusion and improve health and wellbeing

A number of the policies may help to reduce geographical and social exclusion in the district, both cumulatively and indirectly. These factors include: improving the quality of housing and development as well as affordability, improving skills levels and access to community facilities, education and employment. Improving access to health facilities may have more direct benefits on health levels, whereas policies that seek to improve accessibility by sustainable modes of transport and the overall provision of community facilities including open space may not only improve access, but indirectly improve physical and mental health levels through an increase in physical activity. Synergistically, an increase in opportunities for the use of more sustainable modes of transport such as walking and cycling, added to the increased provision of open green space could have multiple environmental benefits, which could include improved air, noise and water quality amongst others. In combination, these factors are likely to have benefits for human health both physically and mentally. Increased community interaction through the above measures of increasing walking as a mode of transport and the provision of areas of open space and community facilities within local areas is also likely to have beneficial effects on encouraging social interaction, which can have increased positive effects on health levels also.

Significant positive effects likely over the longer term as development proposals and infrastructure completed, providing this is done in an equitable way across the plan area and areas of deficiency are targeted.

1-6, 8-16, 18 Cumulative and synergistic effects of increasing accessibility to services and facilities including opportunities for education, training and employment

The policies seek to locate development of opportunities, including for the improvement of the tourism offer, in sustainable locations. This could improve the opportunities for the community to access services, facilities and employment opportunities within the Borough. Transport policies seek to improve the sustainable movement of the population within the Borough, as well as to key employment locations such as Manchester. Collectively the policies within the components identified will offer opportunities for providing employment through new industries such as sustainable tourism, the promotion of rural business, and focusing employment and retail development in key centres and accessible locations.

Significant positive effects in the medium to long term in promoting and supporting employment development throughout Rossendale.

1-9, 11, 18 Cumulative effects of meeting the housing

CS policies cumulatively will meet housing targets and the type of range of housing needed to meet identified needs. Housing development will be delivered to high design standards in accordance with Core Strategy policies, ensuring resource efficiency. Policies seek to provide a

Significant positive effects developing over the medium and longer


182

Policy Component


negative: yellow)

Causes Significance

requirements of Rossendale Borough

range of affordable and supported housing to reflect local needs including the needs of Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople communities.

term as more development opportunities are realised.

All Cumulative and synergistic effects of improving the quality of where people live

A high proportion of the policies will assist in improving the quality of living environments, such as through the CfSH ensuring housing quality and high standards of design in all development, and the requirement for improving infrastructure provision to include green infrastructure.

Significant and sustained effects in creating the culture for quality built and natural environments.

1-3, 7-8, 11, 13, 18

Cumulative effects in conserving natural resources including soils and minerals

Policies seek to encourage development to take place within the urban boundary, seeking to make the best use of under-used, vacant and derelict land and buildings, which will have direct and significant benefits for the protection of greenfield land and the improvement of soil quality on contaminated sites. Policies seek to encourage sustainable design and construction, renewable energy generation, the protection of natural resources and environmental quality that will all contribute to conserving soil, water and mineral resources.

Positive effects overall in terms of protecting and maintaining natural resources.

5, 7, 9, 11-13, 16-18

Cumulative and synergistic effects on contributing to climate change and vulnerability of climatic events and adapting to the effects of climate change

GHG emissions arise from a wide variety of sources including transport, construction, waste transfer and the general operation of buildings (heating and lighting systems). While the cumulative effects of realising the scale of development set out in these policies could result in an overall increase in GHG emissions across the Plan area, the policies should, in combination, afford a combating effect. Policies seeking to encourage an increase in the generation of energy from low and zero carbon sources, particularly wind energy, could play a particular part in this. As part of this, measures to reduce contributions to climate change will also enable adaptation to its effects, including flood risk. For example, sustainable building design will include increased insulating properties, which can help both to improve energy efficiency as well as enable buildings to cope with increased temperature variations. Another example may be the green infrastructure network. The provision of SUDS can help areas adapt to the effects of climate change through reducing surface water runoff and reducing albedo effect and urban heat. Where significant areas of vegetation are created, this may contribute to reduced GHG emissions through carbon sink capacity increases. Where both the insulation improvements and the GI strategy are combined, for example through green roofs, synergistic effects will also include, in addition to those above,

Positive effects overall if the policies in combination with a green infrastructure network are implemented effectively.


183

Policy Component


negative: yellow)

Causes Significance

increased adaptation benefits for biodiversity and flood risk, amongst others.

1-2, 4-7, 11-19

Cumulative positive effects in conserving and enhancing biodiversity

Protection of species and habitat through comprehensive positives to ensure the impact of development is minimised through a concentration of development in existing town, district and neighbourhood centres, and new habitat creation where possible. The creation of a green infrastructure network may enable the species to adapt to the effects of climate change as habitats change. Indirect effects may arise through a potential reduction in overall traffic levels in the medium to long term where a modal shift to more sustainable modes takes place.

Positive effects in the long term if the policies are implemented effectively over time.

1-8, 10-11, 13-19

Cumulative effects in protecting local heritage assets

Protection of sites of heritage assets through comprehensive positives to ensure the impact of development is minimised. Policies include measures to enhance heritage assets in the towns, through measures such as the use of locally distinctive materials to enhance local character; conservation and re-invigoration of the building stock through their redevelopment and re-use; investing in the development of the tourism offer through the regeneration of heritage assets; improvements in the public realm and a likely decrease in traffic levels, seeking to enhance the settings of heritage assets; and reinforces the unique characteristics of place and community within the Borough.

Positive effects in the long term if the policies are implemented effectively over time.

All Cumulative effects of strengthening the local economy in Rossendale

There are a variety of policies for the stimulation of economic growth through revitalising town centres, focusing employment in existing centres and accessible locations, encouraging inward investment and supporting traditional and new rural businesses including sustainable tourism.

Significant positive effects likely over the longer term.

1-8, 10-11, 13-19

Cumulative effects in protecting landscape quality

Cumulative effects in protecting landscape quality through policies that aim to consolidate development within Town, District and Neighbourhood centres, including a commitment to maintaining current Greenbelt and urban boundaries, offering potential to protect the surrounding countryside from development pressure. Proactive policies seeking to enhance landscape quality through management include the development of a comprehensive green infrastructure strategy that includes the improvement in accessibility to the countryside through improvements in PROW. Tourism proposals are to include the promotion of ‘active tourism’, utilising the landscape for economic and social gain, with the potential for the measures to create an 'outdoors' culture in the long term. Whilst seeking to capitalise on the natural assets of the landscape quality, such

Positive effects in the long term if the policies are implemented effectively over time and management of the countryside is developed in a sensitive manner.


184

Policy Component


negative: yellow)

Causes Significance

developments also introduce supporting infrastructure into the landscape and will require careful management to limit potential landscape, noise and visual intrusion. This includes through light pollution.



185

9. Mitigation 9.1 The term mitigation encompasses any approach that is aimed at preventing, reducing or

offsetting significant adverse sustainability effects that have been identified. In practice, a range of measures applying one or more of these approaches is likely to be considered in mitigating any significant adverse effects predicted as a result of implementing the Core Strategy. In addition, it is also important to consider measures aimed at enhancing positive effects. All such measures are generally referred to as mitigation measures.

9.2 Mitigation can take a wide range of forms, including:

• Refining options in order to improve the likelihood of positive effects and to minimise adverse effects;

• Technical measures (such as setting guidelines) to be applied during the implementation stage;

• Identifying issues to be addressed in project environmental impact assessments for certain projects or types of projects;

• Proposals for changing other plans and programmes; and

• Contingency arrangements for dealing with possible adverse effects.

9.3 However, the emphasis should be in the first instance on proactive avoidance of adverse effects. Only once alternative options or approaches to avoiding an effect have been examined should mitigation then examine ways of reducing the scale/importance of the effect.

9.4 Suitable mitigation measures have been considered within the assessment of the Core Strategy policies and are set out in the recommendations proposed.



186

10. Monitoring

Introduction 10.1 This section identifies significant potential sustainability effects and sets out measures to monitor

these effects. Table 10.1 sets out the recommendations that have been made as mitigation or enhancement measures for each topic and related SA Objectives. The recommendations aim to improve the sustainability of the plan and address the significant environmental effects- the table indicates the relevant policies to which these recommendations relate; and suggests appropriate indicators for monitoring the significant environmental effects.

10.2 Monitoring significant effects is a key requirement of the SEA Directive: The SEA Directive states that “member states shall monitor the significant environmental effects of the implementation of plans and programme in order, inter alia, to identify at an early stage unforeseen adverse effects, and to be able to undertake appropriate remedial action” (Article 10.1). The Environmental Report shall include “a description of the measures envisaged concerning monitoring” (Annex I (i)).

10.3 The Council must prepare an Annual Monitoring Report (AMR) setting out, amongst other things, the extent to which the policies set out in the DPDs and SPDs are being achieved. The significant effect indicators (for monitoring important effects identified by the SA) identified through the SA process should ideally be monitored as part of the AMR process, which monitors the performance of the plan. In the case of the monitoring suggestions made, it is important to note that these are initial recommendations. It will be for the Council to consider the practicalities of monitoring and what might be achievable.

Deleted: Table 10.1

Deleted: Table 10.1


187

Table 10.1 – Monitoring Key for table:

Indicators in italics are National Indicators from the Local Area Agreement Indicators in Bold are further indicators currently reported on in the Rossendale Annual Monitoring Report - the LDF Monitoring Framework Indicators underlined are further indicators that it is recommended that the Council collect data on in order to assist with monitoring the potential effects of the Core Strategy on the SA Framework, especially in relation to the recommendations made in this SA Report regarding specific significant effects

No Effect to be

monitored Nature of

effect predicted

Potential key indicators Direction of Change or Target

Suggested frequency of

review/analysis of monitoring

data/mitigation

Responsibility for undertaking

monitoring

1. Effect on protecting and enhancing places, landscapes and heritage assets

Positive effects

Number of heritage assets ‘at risk’ (Registered sites, Listed Buildings, Scheduled Monuments and Conservation Areas)

Reduce Annual RBC

Number of Conservation Area Appraisals and associated Management Plans prepared

Increase Annual RBC and English Heritage

Development within area of landscape designation Reduce Annual RBC

2. Effect on protecting, enhancing and managing biodiversity and geodiversity in Rossendale

Positive effects

NI197 – Improved local biodiversity ((proportion of local sites where positive conservation management has been or is being implemented)

Increase Annual RBC

No. of developments including schemes to protect and/or enhance existing biodiversity

Increase Annual RBC

Change in priority habitats and change in priority species (by type)

See NW habitat targets by county to 2015 http://www.biodiversitynw.org.uk/page.asp?id=79

Annual RBC


188

No Effect to be monitored

Nature of effect

predicted




data/mitigation


monitoring

Number, area and condition of international, national, regional and locally designated sites

By 2010, to ensure that 95% of SSSIs are favourable or in a recovering condition Source: National PSA Target

Annual RBC and Natural England

3. Effect on protecting and improving the quality of Rossendale’s waterways and to sustainably manage water resources

Positive effects

Length of watercourses of good biological and chemical quality

91% of river lengths in the UK should be of good quality by 2010 Source: Environment Agency

Annual RBC

Average daily water consumption (l/head/day) Achieving the equivalent of 3 stars under the Code for Sustainable Homes for water use (105 litres/capita/day) as a minimum

Annual RBC

Number of planning permissions granted contrary to the advice of the EA on water quality grounds

Decrease Annual RBC

4. Effect on promoting adaptation to Rossendale’s changing climate

Positive effects

NI 188 – Adapting to climate change (built environment)

No target identified Annual RBC

Number of applications incorporating improvements to green infrastructure network including SUDS and habitat connectivity

Increase Annual RBC

5. Effect on reducing flood risk

Positive effects

No. of applications including Sustainable Drainage Systems

Increase Annual RBC

Number of planning permissions granted contrary to the advice of the EA on flood risk grounds

Zero Annual RBC

NI189 - flood and coastal risk management No target identified Annual RBC


189


Nature of effect

predicted




data/mitigation


monitoring

6. Effect on minimising the requirement for energy use, promoting efficient energy use and increasing the use of energy from renewable resources

Range of positive and negative effects

NI 186 – Per capita reduction in CO2 emissions in the LA area

To reduce CO2 emissions 80% by 2050 from a 1990 baseline figure (national target) Source: UK Climate Change Act 2008

Annual RBC

Renewable energy capacity installed by type Increase Annual RBC

Amount of energy produced by low or zero carbon energy sources (by type of scheme)

Increase Annual RBC

Proportion of potential capacity for renewable energy from wind developed

Increase Annual RBC

% of development meeting Code For Sustainable Homes or BREEAM standards

All new dwellings to meet Code level 4 by 2013 and Code level 6 by 2016. All non residential development to meet BREEAM ‘very good’ or Excellent’ standard Source: Communities and Local Government

Annual RBC

Energy efficiency – the average SAP rating of local authority owned dwellings (1 – highly inefficient, 100 – highly efficient)

Increase Annual RBC

7. Effect on protecting and improving land

Positive effects

% of development on Greenfield sites Reduce Annual RBC Amount of floorspace by employment type, which is on previously developed land

Increase Annual RBC

Formatted: Space After: 0.6 line





190


Nature of effect

predicted




data/mitigation


monitoring

quality in Rossendale

Percentage of new and converted dwellings on previously developed land

At least 60 per cent of new housing should be provided on previously developed land. Source: PPS3, 2010

Annual RBC

% of contaminated land identified Increase Annual RBC % of contaminated land reclaimed Increase Annual RBC

8. Effect on protecting and improving air quality and minimising noise and light pollution

Range of positive and negative effects

Developments that contribute to the enhancement of Green Infrastructure

Increase Annual RBC

Estimated traffic flows for all vehicle types (million vehicle kilometres)

Decrease Annual RBC

Number of days on which air quality is moderate or high for NO2, SO2, O3, CO or PM10

To meet National Air Quality Standards

Updating and Screening Assessments every 3 years and a Progress Report annually where there are no air quality reviews

RBC

Proportion of the population living within proximity to major roads or other noise and light polluting land uses

Decrease Annual RBC

9. Effect on ensuring the efficient use of natural resources and sustainable management of waste

Positive effects

NI 192 – Household waste recycled and composted Increase Annual RBC

Proportion of new developments incorporating recycling facilities

Increase Annual RBC

Amount of municipal waste arising by management type, and the percentage each management type represents of the waste managed

Increase Annual RBC

10. Effect on improving

Positive effects

NI 155 – Number of affordable homes delivered (gross)

Increase Annual RBC


191


Nature of effect

predicted




data/mitigation


monitoring

access to a range of good quality, affordable and resource efficient housing to meets the needs of the community of Rossendale

Income to average house price ratio Improve ratio Annual RBC % of households rated unfit Decrease Annual RBC Increase in appropriate pitch provision to meet the identified needs of Gypsy, Traveller and Travelling Showpeople

Increase Annual RBC

Proportion of housing developments that address identified local needs

Increase Annual RBC

11. Effect on improving access to basic goods, services and amenities and increasing equality of opportunity in Rossendale

Positive effects


100% Annual RBC

Percentage of rural households within set distances (either 4km or 2km) of key services

Increase Annual RBC

Quality, length and accessibility of Public Rights of Way

Increase Annual RBC

12. Effect on improving physical and mental health and well-being and reducing inequalities in health

Positive effects

NI 142 – Number of vulnerable people who are supported to maintain independent living


NI 119 – Self-reported measure of people’s overall health and wellbeing


NI 1 – People from different backgrounds getting on well together

Increase Annual RBC

NI 47 – People killed or seriously injured in road traffic accidents

Decrease Annual RBC


192


Nature of effect

predicted




data/mitigation


monitoring

NI 55 – Obesity among primary school age children in Reception Year

Decrease Annual RBC

Number of households within 30 minutes of key service centres by public transport.

Increase Annual RBC

NI 16 – Serious acquisitive crime rate Decrease Annual RBC NI 8 - adult participation in sport and active recreation 70% of population to

participate in 30 mins activity 5 times a week by 2020 Source: The Framework for Sport in England: A Vision for 2020

Annual RBC

Proportion of development incorporating Secured by Design standards or equivalent

Increase Annual RBC


193


Nature of effect

predicted




data/mitigation


monitoring

Proportion of developments meeting Natural England Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards (ANGSt)

ANGSt recommends that everyone, wherever they live, should have an accessible natural greenspace: • of at least 2 hectares

in size, no more than 300 metres (5 minutes walk) from home;

• at least one accessible 20 hectare site within two kilometres of home;

• one accessible 100 hectare site within five kilometres of home; and

• one accessible 500 hectare site within ten kilometres of home; plus

• a minimum of one hectare of statutory Local Nature Reserves per thousand population.

13. Effect on improving education, skills and

Positive effects

NI 163 – Working age population qualified to at least level 2 or higher

Increase Annual RBC

NI 165 – Working age population qualified to at least level 4 or higher

Increase Annual RBC


194


Nature of effect

predicted




data/mitigation


monitoring

qualifications in the Borough and providing opportunities for lifelong learning

Number of S106 agreements requiring skills, education or training facilities provision or improvement

Increase Annual RBC

14. Effect on supporting a strong, diverse, vibrant and sustainable local economy

Positive effects

NI 153 – Working age people claiming out of work benefits in the worst performing neighbourhoods


NI 171 – New business registration rate No target identified Annual RBC

NI 166 – Average earnings of employees in the area No target identified Annual RBC

Proportion of new employment development that matches the local skills profile

Increase Annual RBC

15. Effect on supporting the development of the sustainable leisure, cultural and tourism industry

Positive effects

Additional expenditure in the Borough as a result of the tourism industry

Increase Annual RBC

Development of facilities to increase the leisure and tourism offer that will be accessible to the local community

Increase Annual RBC

Expenditure in the Borough as a result of the tourism industry

Increase Annual RBC

16. Effect on enhancing the vitality and viability of town and village centres in the Borough

Positive effects

Percentage change in the development of services, facilities and employment in Town, District and Neighbourhood Centres

Increase Annual RBC

Access to employment, services and facilities by walking and cycling

Increase Annual RBC

Footfall in Town, District and Neighbourhood Centres Increase Annual RBC Vacancy rates in Town, District and Neighbourhood Centres

Decrease Annual RBC


195


Nature of effect

predicted




data/mitigation


monitoring

Employment rate in Town, District and Neighbourhood Centres

Increase Annual RBC

17. Effect on improving the choice and use of sustainable transport in Rossendale and reducing the need to travel

Positive effects

Proportion of the working age population travelling to work by public transport, walking and cycling

Increase Annual RBC

Proportion of school age children travelling to school by public transport, walking and cycling

Increase Annual RBC

Proportion of new development that will contribute to enhanced provision of public transport, walking and cycling facilities

Increase Annual RBC

Proportion of developments that create an appropriate mix of uses so as to reduce the need to travel for inhabitants

Increase Annual RBC


196

11. Conclusions 11.1 The Core Policies within the Rossendale Core Strategy DPD meet, to a large extent, the range of

sustainability objectives identified in the SA framework, on the whole achieving a balance of positive significant effects.

11.2 Recommendations have been made previously on earlier iterations of the policies through the SA and HRA processes. Many of these recommendations have been taken forward and are reflected in the Publication Version of the Core Strategy Policies, to ensure that they deliver sustainable development.

11.3 The majority of the predicted effects for the Publication Version of the Core Strategy are significantly positive. Significant positive effects, with no significantly negative effects, are predicted against the following SA objectives:

• 1: To protect, enhance and manage places, landscapes and buildings of historic, cultural and archaeological value;

• 2: To protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity in Rossendale;

• 3: To protect and improve the quality of Rossendale’s waterways and to sustainably manage water resources;

• 4: To promote adaptation to Rossendale’s changing climate;

• 5: To reduce flood risk in Rossendale from rivers;

• 7: To protect and improve land quality in Rossendale;

• 9: To ensure that the efficient use of natural resources and sustainable management of waste, minimise its production and increase re-use, recycling and recovery rates;

• 10: To improve access to a range of good quality, affordable and resource efficient housing that meets the needs of the community of Rossendale;

• 11: To improve access to basic goods, services and amenities and equality of opportunity in Rossendale;

• 12: To improve physical and mental health and well-being of people and reduce health inequalities in Rossendale;

• 13: To improve education, skills and qualifications in the Borough and provide opportunities for lifelong learning;

• 14: To support a strong, diverse, vibrant and sustainable local economy to foster balanced economic growth;

• 15: Support the development of the sustainable leisure, cultural and tourism industry;

• 16: To maintain and enhance the vitality and viability of town and village centres in the Borough; and

• 17: To improve the choice and use of sustainable transport in Rossendale and reduce the need to travel.

11.4 A mix of both significant positive and negative effects is predicted for two of the SA objectives:

• 6: To minimise the requirement for energy use, promote efficient energy use and increase the use of energy from renewable resources; and

• 8: To protect and improve air quality and minimise noise and light pollution in Rossendale.


197

11.5 It should be noted that although some negative effects are predicted for the above SA objectives, the significant positive effects are much greater in number. Therefore an overall positive effect with regards to the performance of the Core Strategy against the SA objectives is predicted. In addition, the HRA concludes that: “it is considered that the Publication Version of the Core Strategy and its policies will not (alone or in combination) lead to likely significant effects on the qualifying features of the five international sites that have been considered.”

Sustainability Appraisal

It has been necessary to assess the effect of the Schedule of Proposed Changes (May 2011) on the Objectives of the Sustainability Appraisal in order to consider the implications. This Sustainability Assessment Update accompanies the Sustainability Appraisal undertaken by Atkins and published in November 2010 to accompany the Publication Version of the Core Strategy DPD.

This Sustainability Appraisal (SA) Update has been prepared to fulfil the requirements for SA arising from the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and the requirements for Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) arising from the SEA Directive. The purpose of SA is to promote sustainable development through better integration of sustainability (economic, social and environmental) considerations in the preparation and adoption of plans. The SEA Directive requires that certain plans and programmes undergo an environmental assessment, due to the likelihood that they will have significant environmental effects once implemented.

The following table shows whether the performance of the Core Strategy policies against the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) Objectives has changed as a result of the proposed changes. Where a policy has increased its performance against an SA Objective, the appropriate box in the table has been given a yellow border. Where performance has diminished, the appropriate box has an orange border. Other than this, the table uses the same symbols as the Atkins Sustainability Appraisal.

The two most significant changes which are proposed to the Core Strategy are the alteration of Policy 1 to allow small scale Green Belt boundary changes, and an increase in overall housing numbers under Policy 2.

In terms of Sustainability Appraisal, the changes to Policy 1 have resulted in a slight decrease in the performance of the policy against SA Objective 1 (the protection, enhancement and management of places, landscapes and buildings of historic, cultural and archaeological value), due to the limited impacts on the Green Belt (and landscapes) which could potentially occur over the plan period.

The changes to Policy 2 have resulted in a decrease in the performance of the policy against SA Objectives 7, 9, 11 and 12. This is due to the increased number of houses planned for delivery between 2011 and 2026, and the corresponding greater impact that this is likely to have on land quality, use of natural resources, sustainable waste management, access to services and recreational opportunities. It should be noted that an earlier Sustainability Appraisal was undertaken in the production of the Core Strategy DPD (at Proposed Way Forward stage during November / December 2009),

which included higher levels of housing development, and no significant adverse effects were identified.

Other policies of the Core Strategy (including those set out in the Area Visions) have undergone a limited range of changes in performance against the SA Objectives due to wording amendments, though it is not considered that the overall sustainability of the plan has been significantly affected, as none of the changes results in an overall negative impact.

Comments have been included within the Table (bottom row) to explain how the Proposed Changes have affected performance against the Strategic Objectives of the Sustainability Appraisal. Blank cells indicate that the Policy has not been amended.

For more detailed information on the Sustainability Appraisal process and recommendations please refer to the full Sustainability Appraisal Report (Atkins, November 2010).

AVP1

Strategy for Whitw

orth, Facit and

Shaw

forth

AVP2

Strategy for Ba

cup, Stacksteads,

Brita

nnia and

Shawforth

AVP3

Strategy for Waterfoot, Cow

pe, Lum

b and Water

AVP4

Strategy for Ra

wtenstall,

Craw

shaw

booth, Goo

dshaw and

Loveclou

gh

AVP5

Strategy for South West R

ossend

ale

AVP6

Strategy for Haslingden

and

Rising

Bridge

Policy 1 ‐ G

eneral Develop

men

t Locations

and Principles

Policy 2 ‐ M

eetin

g Ro

ssen

dale's Hou

sing

Re

quirem

ent

Policy 3 ‐ D

istribution of Add

ition

al Hou

sing

Policy 4 ‐ A

ffordable and Supp

orted

Hou

sing

Policy 5 ‐ M

eetin

g the Needs of G

ypsies,

Travellers and

Travelling

Sho

wpe

ople

Policy 6 ‐ T

raining and Skills

Policy 7 ‐ Social Infrastructure

Policy 8 ‐ T

ranspo

rt

Policy 9 ‐ A

ccessibility

Policy 10

‐ Em

ploymen

t Provision

Policy 11

‐ Re

tail and Other Tow

n Ce

ntre

Uses

Policy 12

‐ Th

e Valley Ce

ntre

Policy 13

‐ Protectin

g Ke

y Local Retail

Policy 14

‐ To

urism

Policy 15

‐ Overnight Visito

r Accom

mod

ation

Policy 16

‐ Preserving

and

Enh

ancing

the

Built Environ

men

t

Policy 17

‐ Ro

ssen

dale's Green

Infrastructure

Policy 18

‐ Biod

iversity, G

eodiversity

and

Land

scape Co

nservatio

n

Policy 19

‐ Clim

ate Ch

ange and

Low

and

Zero Carbo

n Sources of Ene

rgy

Policy 20

‐ Wind En

ergy

Policy 21

‐ Supp

ortin

g the Ru

ral Econo

my

and its Com

mun

ities

Policy 22

‐ Planning

Con

tributions

Policy 23

‐ Prom

oting High Quality Design

and Spaces

Policy 24

‐ Planning

App

lication

Requ

irem

ents

1 To protect, enhance and manage places, landscapes and buildings of historic, cultural and archaeological value

++ ++ +++ +++ + ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + 0 + + + ++ ++ +++ ++ +++ +++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ +++ +++

2 To protect, enhance and manage biodiversity and geodiversity in Rossendale

+ ++ + ++ ++ ++ +++ + + + + 0 + ++ ++ ++ + ++ + ++ ++ ++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ Key: +++ Strongly positive effect

3 To protect and improve the quality of Rossendale's waterways and to sustainably manage water resources

++ + + + + + +++ + + + + 0 + ++ ++ ‐ ‐ + ‐ + + + +++ +++ ++ ++ ‐ + + +++ ++ Moderately positive effect

4 To promote adaptation to Rossendale's changing climate

+ + + + ++ + ++ + + + ++ + ++ ++ ++ + + + + ++ ++ + +++ ++ +++ 0 + ++ ++ ++ + Slightly positive effect

5 To reduce flood risk in Rossendale from rivers

++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + + + +/‐ 0 ++ ++ ++ +/‐ +/‐ ++ +/‐ ++ ++ + +++ + +++ 0 +/‐ ++ ++ ++ 0 No effect

6 To minimise the requirement for energy use, promote efficient energy use and increase the use of energy from renewable resources

++ + + ++ + + ++ + + + 0 0 +++ +++ +++ ++ ‐‐ ++ ‐‐ + + + ++ 0 +++ +++ ++ +++ +++ ++ ‐ Slightly negative effect

7 To protect and improve land quality in Rossendale

+ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ ++ +++ + + ++ + + ++ ++ ++ ++ + + ++ ++ + + 0 ++ ++ ++ +++ ‐‐ Moderately negative effect

8 To protect and improve air quality and minimise noise and light pollution in Rossendale

‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ‐ ++ ‐‐ ‐‐ ‐ ‐ 0 + + + ‐‐ ++ ‐ ++ ‐‐ ‐‐ + ++ ++ ++ ‐ 0 + + ++ ‐‐‐ Strongly negative effect

9 To ensure the efficient use of natural resources and sustainable management of waste, minimise its production and increase re‐use, recycling and recovery rates

++ ++ ++ + + + +++ 0 0 0 ‐ + ++ + + +/‐ ‐ + ‐ ++ ++ + 0 0 ++ 0 +/‐ ++ ++ +++ +/‐ Combination of positive and negative effects / neutral effect

10 To improve access to a range of good quality affordable and resource efficient housing that meets the needs of the community of Rossendale

++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + 0 + 0 0 0 0 ++ 0 0 0 0 0 0 ++ 0 0 ++ ++ ++

11 To improve access to basic goods, services and amenities and equality of opportunity in Rossendale

++ +++ +++ +++ +++ ++ + + + + + ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ 0 ++ 0 ++ ++ ++ + Positive change in significance of effect(s) since September 2010 Sustainability Appraisal (Atkins)

12 To improve physical and mental health and well‐being of people and reduce health inequalities in Rossendale

++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ + + + ++ ++ ++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ +++ 0 ++ ++ ++ +++

13 To improve education, skills and qualifications in the Borough and provide opportunities for lifelong learning

+ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + 0 0 0 ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + 0 ++ + +++ ++ ++ + Negative change in significance of effect(s) since September 2010 Sustainability Appraisal (Atkins)

14 To support a strong, diverse, vibrant and sustainable local economy to foster balanced economic growth

++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + + + + + +++ ++ +++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ +++ +++ +++ ++ + ++ 0 +++ ++ ++ +

15 Support the development of the sustainable leisure, cultural and tourism industry

+++ +++ +++ +++ +++ +++ + 0 0 0 0 +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ +++ +++ +++ ++ ++ + + ++ ++ ++ +

16 To maintain and enhance the vitality and viability of town and village centres in the Borough

++ ++ +++ +++ ++ ++ + ++ ++ ++ + + ++ +++ +++ ++ +++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ + ++ 0 ++ ++ ++ +

17 To improve the choice and use of sustainable transport in Rossendale and reduce the need to travel

++ ++ +++ +++ ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ 0 ++ ++ ++ ++ ++ +++ ++ ++ ++ + +++ 0 ++ 0 ++ ++ ++ ++

Performance of p

olicy against SA Objectives 2 and 7 redu

ced following removal of w

ording

on

maintaining

current Green

Belt a

nd Urban

Bou

ndaries.

Performance of p

olicy against SA Objective 17 increased following addition

of w

ording

on developing

new and

linking existing

cycleways, mou

ntain bike rou

tes, bridlew

ays and walking

rou

tes.

Performance of p

olicy against SA Objective 1 reduced

following removal of w

ording

on maintaining

current G

reen

Belt b

ound

aries. Perform

ance against SA Objective 2 rem

ains th

e same as th

e removal of

Green

Belt w

ording

is balanced by add

ition of wording

on protection

and

enh

ancement o

f SSSIs.

Performance of p

olicy against SA Objectives 15

and

17 increased following addition

of w

ording

on

completion of th

e nation

al cycle rou

te from

Helmshore to Rising Bridge.

Performance against SA Objective 1 reduced

following alteration

of p

olicy wording

to reflect th

e intention to carry out a limited

review of G

reen

Belt b

ound

aries.

Performance of p

olicy against a

num

ber of SA Objectives has changed du

e to th

e Sustainability App

raisal

previously assessing

it as part of a

group

('Hou

sing'). Changes in th

e table are du

e to th

e po

licy no

w being

assessed

on its ow

n. How

ever, due

to th

e increased ho

using nu

mbers in th

e latest policy, perform

ance

against SA Objective 7 has reduced.

Performance of p

olicy against a

num


e to th


raisal


it as part of a

group

('Hou


e table are du

e to th

e po

licy no

w being

assessed

on its ow

n. How

ever, due

to th

e increased ho

using nu

mbers in th

e latest policy, perform

ance

against SA Objective 7 has reduced.

Performance of p

olicy against a

num


e to th


raisal


it as part of a

group

('Hou


e table are du

e to th

e po

licy no

w being

assessed

on its ow

n.

Performance of the

policy against SA Objectives 10

and

11 redu

ced following the alteration

of p

olicy text

regarding locating

sites within 80

0m rather than

400

m of a

bus rou

te.

Performance of p

olicy against the

majority of SA Objectives has changed du

e to th

e Sustainability

App

raisal previou

sly assessing it as part of a

group

('Skills, Employment a

nd Econo

my'). Ch

anges in ta

ble

are du

e to th

e po

licy no

w being

assessed on

its ow

n.

Performance of p

olicy against the

majority of SA Objectives has changed du

e to th

e Sustainability

App

raisal previou

sly assessing it as part of a

group

('Sustainable Co

mmun

ities'). Ch

anges in ta

ble are du

e to th

e po

licy no

w being

assessed on

its ow

n.

Performance of p

olicy against SA Objective 16 increased following addition

of w

ording

on the

requ

irem

ent for propo

sals fo

r new con

venience retail floorspace (>20

0 sq.m

) outside

PSA

s to

demon

strate adh

erence to

a more comprehensive suite of criteria.

Performance of p

olicy against SA Objectives 2 and 3 increased following addition

of w

ording

to sup

port

the managem

ent a

nd enh

ancement o

f river corrido

rs.

Performance of p

olicy against SA Objective 8 increased, as the Sustainability App

raisal previou

sly

assessed

the po

licy as part o

f a group

('Skills, Employment a

nd Econo

my'). When assessed

alone, it is no

t considered

that th

e po

licy will have any significant negative effects on

air quality, noise and

light

pollution

, as includ

ed in SA Objective 8.

Policy

SA Objective

Comments on any changes in significance of direct effects on Core Strategy policies (affected categories are highlighted with a yellow border in the table).


198

12. Glossary and References Glossary

Abbreviation Definition

AA Appropriate Assessment

AMR Annual Monitoring Report

ANGSt Natural England Accessible Natural Greenspace Standards. ANGSt is based on three principles: a) Improving access. b) Improving naturalness. c) Improving connectivity Natural does not necessarily mean it has to be rare or notable enough to be designated. Users will find nature in wildlife, open landscapes, seasonal changes and places of tranquillity.

AQMA Air Quality Management Area

BAP Biodiversity Action Plan

BREEAM Built Research Establishment Environmental Assessment Method

BVPI Best Value Performance Indicator

Carbon sequestration The removal of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere; generally through photosynthesis to fix it as organic compounds in plants and soils; increasing the potential for carbon sequestration is a goal of the Kyoto Protocol.

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CS Core Strategy

CfSH Code for Sustainable Homes

DECC Department for Energy and Climate Change

Defra Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs

DPD Development Plan Document

EA Environment Agency

Evapotranspiration The process by which the Earth's surface or soil loses moisture by evaporation of water and by uptake and then transpiration from plants.

FRA Flood Risk Assessment

GHG Greenhouse Gas

GVA Gross Value Added

HRA Habitats Regulations Assessment

IMD Index of Multiple Deprivation

LBAP Local Biodiversity Action Plan

LDD Local Development Document

LDF Local Development Framework

LDS Local Development Scheme

LNR Local Nature Reserve


199

Abbreviation Definition

LPA Local Planning Authority

LSOA Lower Super Output Area

LSP Local Strategic Partnership

NI National Indicator

NO2; NOx Nitrogen dioxide; oxides of nitrogen

NTS Non-Technical Summary

NVQ National Vocational Qualification- NVQs are at levels 1 to 5 on the National Qualifications Framework.

NWDA North West Regional Development Agency

ODPM Office of the Deputy Prime Minister

PCC Per capita consumption

PM10 Fine particles

PPG Planning Policy Guidance

PPS Planning Policy Statement

RIGS Regionally Important Geological and Geomorphological Sites

RSS Regional Spatial Strategy

SA Sustainability Appraisal

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SM Scheduled Monument

SAP Standard Assessment Procedure

SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment

SFRA Strategic Flood Risk Assessment

SHLAA Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment

SME Small and Medium-Sized Enterprise

SFRA Strategic Flood Risk Assessment

SHLAA Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment

SPA Special Protection Area

SPD Supplementary Planning Document

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest

STEAM Scarborough Tourism Economic Activity Monitor

SUDS Sustainable Drainage Systems

UKCIP United Kingdom Climate Impacts Programme

WHO World Health Organization


200

References • CABE 2009 Open Space Strategies – Best Practice Guidance,

http://www.cabe.org.uk/files/open-space-strategies.pdf

• CLG (February 2008) The Code for Sustainable Homes: Setting the standard in sustainability for new homes, http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/codesustainabilitystandards

• Countryside Agency, 2005, By all reasonable means: Inclusive access to the outdoors for disabled people.’ CA 215. http://naturalengland.etraderstores.com/NaturalEnglandShop/CA215

• Countryside Agency and Groundwork 2005, The Countryside In and around Towns – a vision for Connecting Town and Country in Pursuit of Sustainable Development’ http://naturalengland.etraderstores.com/naturalenglandshop/product.aspx?ProductID=95e404a1-d9e6-44f3-9540-17508b8340c5

• Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs: Guidance on Guidance for Local Authorities on Implementing the Biodiversity Duty http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/biodiversity/documents/la-guid-english.pdf

• Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs 2010, UK Biodiversity Indicators in Your Pocket 2010, http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/environment/wildlife/download/pdf/biyp2010.pdf

• The Natural Environment and Communities Act 2006: http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060016_en_4#pt3-pb1-l1g40

• Department for Transport et al (December 2007) Manual for Streets, http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/sustainable/manforstreets/pdfmanforstreets.pdf

• Department for Transport, Accessibility Planning Guidance: Full Guidance, http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/regional/ltp/accessibility/guidance/gap/accessibilityplanningguidanc3633?page=11#a1075

• Environment Agency (March 2010) New Development and Flood Risk Standing Advice http://www.environment-agency.gov.uk/static/documents/Research/New_FRSA_system_26_01_092.pdf

• English Heritage (June 2005) Environmental Quality in Spatial Planning: Incorporating the natural, built and historic environment and rural issues in plans and strategies http://www.english-heritage.org.uk/publications/environmental-quality-in-spatial-planning/

• European Commission (2001) Directive 2001/42/EC "on the assessment of the effects of certain plans and programmes on the environment” http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/sea-support.htm

• Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Geological Conservation Review: Key aspects of Common Standards Monitoring (CSM), http://www.jncc.gov.uk/page-2219

• North West Green Infrastructure Think Tank 2010, Green Infrastructure: how and where can it help the North West mitigate and adapt to climate change?, http://www.greeninfrastructurenw.co.uk/html/index.php?page=resources&NorthWestRegion=true


201

• North West Biodiversity Forum 2008. Embedding Regional Biodiversity Targets into Local development Frameworks. NW habitat targets by county to 2015 http://www.biodiversitynw.org.uk/page.asp?id=79

• ODPM (August 2006). A Practical Guide to the Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/practicalguidesea

• ODPM (November 2005) Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Documents http://www.communities.gov.uk/publications/planningandbuilding/sustainabilityappraisal

• Office of Science and Technology, 2004, Foresight Future Flooding Report, http://www.defra.gov.uk/environment/flooding/policy/guidance/smp.htm

• Environmental Assessments of Plans and Programmes Regulations (Statutory Instrument 2004 no. 1633) http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2004/20041633.htm

• Natural England, Nature Nearby’ Accessible Natural Greenspace Guidance, March 2010 http://naturalengland.etraderstores.com/NaturalEnglandShop/product.aspx?ProductID=887a3e18-5296-4f1f-ae0c-15e02debf0e5

• The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2004/ukpga_20040005_en_1

• Town and Country Planning Association 2004. Biodiversity by Design: A Guide for Sustainable Communities, http://www.tcpa.org.uk/data/files/bd_biodiversity.pdf

• Tyldesley. D. 2009. Climate change and biodiversity adaptation: the role of the spatial planning system. Natural England Commissioned Report, Number 004. http://naturalengland.etraderstores.com/NaturalEnglandShop/Product.aspx?ProductID=1b0e18e5-cf75-4068-a644-05bd294e2cfb

• Rossendale Borough Council Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment (2009)

• Rossendale Borough Council May 2010, 2010 Air Quality Progress Report

• Rossendale Borough Council: Level 1 Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (2009) http://www.rossendale.gov.uk/downloads/Rossendale_BC_Level_1_SFRA_Final_May_09.pdf

• Rossendale Strategic Housing Market Assessment 2008 Final Report February 2009 Fordham Research http://www.rossendale.gov.uk/site/downloads/Rossendale%20SHMA%20FINALop.pdf

• The Town and Country Planning (Local Development) (England) (Amendment) Regulations 2008, http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/uksi_20081371_en_1

If you would like a summary of this leaflet in large print, on audio cassette or

in a language other than English, please let us know and we will be happy to

arrange it.

Please telephone 01706 217777 or Contact Communications Section, Town

Centre Offices, Rawtenstall, BB4 7LZ


202

Rossendale Borough Council Core Strategy: The … · Sustainability Appraisal of the Core Stra tegy...

Documents

Transcript of Rossendale Borough Council Core Strategy: The … · Sustainability Appraisal of the Core Stra tegy...