Flood Risk Sequential Assessment
Beeston Business Park, Beeston, Nottinghamshire
Prepared on behalf of: M7 Real Estate LLP
PlanIT Planning and
Development Ltd
2
CONTENTS
1.0 INTRODUCTION
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
3.0 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
4.0 PLANNING POLICY AND FLOOD RISK
5.0 SCOPE OF SEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT
6.0 THE SEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT
7.0 CONCLUSION
Appendix 1 – Site Location Plan
Appendix 2 - Masterplan
3
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 This Flood Risk Sequential Assessment report has been prepared by PlanIT on
behalf of M7 Real Estate LLP. It accompanies a planning application proposing a
residential led mixed use redevelopment of land at Beeston Business Park. A plan
showing the extent of the application site can be found at Appendix 1.
1.2 The planning application has been submitted as a ‘hybrid’ planning application.
Outline planning permission is sought for the residential element and full planning
permission is sought for the commercial element. A full description of the proposed
development can be found in the Planning Supporting Statement.
1.3 The planning application site is predominantly previously developed land which
extends to some 19.6 hectares (48.6 acres). The proposed development is divided
into two separate areas. Commercial and residential development is proposed on
the northern part of the site and will include the retention of existing industrial units,
two new ‘business centre’ office blocks, light industrial ,retail units and associated
car parking. The residential element is on 6.23 hectares of the site. The
development in the southern area includes sports pitches and a new pavilion and
social club building including squash courts; a discrete parcel of land fronting South
Road and Trent Vale Road, is also proposed for residential development; this will
contribute c25units within an overall residential development of between 200-250
units. A copy of the indicative masterplan that forms part of the planning application
is attached in appendix 2.
1.4 The planning application has been submitted with a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA)
prepared by BWB Consulting. The FRA confirms that The Environment Agency
Flood Maps for Planning identify the site as falling within Flood Zones 3 and 2. A
copy of the Environment Agency Flood Risk Map is set out below. Following the
advice in the National Planning Policy Framework (The Framework) it is necessary
for a sequential test to be submitted with the planning application to demonstrate to
the Local Planning Authority (LPA) that no other development sites at a lower flood
risk are available for the proposed development. The scope of the sequential test
has been agreed with Officers during the course of the pre-application discussions.
4
Figure 1: EA Flood Risk Map
1.5 Table 2 of the Framework Technical Guide classifies land use. Under these
classifications the proposed development use, which includes residential
development, is considered to be a ‘More Vulnerable use’. Table 3 of the Framework
Technical Guide identifies that a ‘More Vulnerable’ development proposed within
Flood Zone 3 is considered to be ‘appropriate’ if it can satisfy the requirements of the
‘Exception Test’. Part of the proposed residential development falls within an area
classified by the EA as Flood Zone 3. The accompanying FRA therefore addresses
the requirements of the Exceptions Test and concludes that the requirements of the
Exceptions test can be passed.
5
2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION
2.1 A detailed description of the application site and the surrounding area can be found
in the accompanying Planning Statement and Design and Access Statement. The
key features of the application site are set out below:
The application site is predominantly previously developed land. The vast
majority of the proposed built development will be on the previously
developed part of the site.
The site is approximately 19.6 hectares in size.
The site broadly comprises two separate parcels of land. The northern section
of the site is boarded to the north by a railway line, (The Midland Mainline) to
the east by Meadow Road and Trent Road, to the South by the rear gardens
of the properties access of Trent Vale Road and to the west by a tree belt with
a nature reserve beyond. The southern section of the site comprises a sports
ground and is boarded to the north by Trent Vale Road, to the east by South
Road and the rear gardens of the properties with access off Trent Road.
A watercourse, (name unknown - tributary of the River Trent) is present within
the south west of the northern section. This is understood to essentially be an
open section of surface water sewer to which the majority of the northern
section drains to.
There are a variety of land uses surrounding the site. This includes
substantial areas of residential development, areas of public open space
including the Chilwell Manor golf course, commercial development to the
north east and the Attenborough Nature Reserve to the west.
The site is in a sustainable location for development with good access to
services, facilities, job opportunities and sustainable transport links, including
Beeston train station to the north.
6
3.0 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL
3.1 The planning application has been submitted as a hybrid planning application.
Outline planning permission is sought for the residential element of the proposal
and full planning permission is sought for the commercial element. The submitted
masterplan shows the proposed arrangement of the land uses;it can be found at
Appendix 2 of this report. The accompanying Planning Statement and Design and
Access Statement provides a detailed description of the proposed development.
The key elements of the proposed development include:
Retained commercial buildings (shown shaded grey on the masterplan)
Rail station parking – 0.15ha
Two Motortrade units – each 325sqm/3,500sqf unit.
Terrace of 4x Retail/Crèche units – totalling 420sqm/4,500sqft unit
Additional office car parking
Food retail – 420sqm/4,500 sqft unit
Medical centre – 464 sqm (16,380 sq ft)
Two ‘business centres’ each providing 3,250sqm/35,000sqft of floorspace
Eleven light industrial/trade counter units providing 230sqm/2,500sqft of
floorspace each
Fifteen light industrial units of 465sqm/5,000sqft each
6.23ha of residential development on the northern section of the site
0.67ha of residential development on the southern section of the site
A pavilion, social club and squash courts
Sports pitches
A Local Area of Play (LAP)
Associated infrastructure
3.2 It should be noted that whilst there are a range of land uses proposed across the site,
the range of uses have been identified to reflect occupier interest and to ensure
scheme viability. The residential element of the proposed development will be sold to
a house builder; the land receipt from that land sale will subsidies the development of
the commercial elements of the scheme. The proposed range of land uses are
therefore a “package” which cannot be disaggregated for the purposes of the
sequential test.
7
4.0 PLANNING POLICY AND FLOOD RISK
Nation Planning Policy Framework
4.1 In March 2012 the Government published the National Planning Policy Framework
(The Framework). This document replaces the Government’s previous planning
guidance of flood risk set out in PPS25 – Development and Flood Risk. The
Framework also advises that all existing local planning policies should be read in
conjunction with The Framework. Where there is a conflict between existing
planning policies and The Framework the weight that should be applied to existing
policies in the decision making process should be reduced (paragraph 215).
4.2 The Framework confirms that the aim of the Sequential Test is to steer new
development to areas with the lowest risk of flooding. Developments should not be
permitted if there are reasonable alternative sites available for the proposed
development in areas with a lower probability of flooding. A sequential approach
should be used in areas known to be at risk of any form of flooding.
4.3 If, following application of the Sequential Test, it is not possible or consistent with
wider sustainability objectives for the development to be located in zones with a
lower probability of flooding, the Exception Test can be applied if appropriate. For
the Exception Test to be passed:
It must be demonstrated that the development provides wider sustainability
benefits to the community that outweigh flood risk, informed by a Strategic
Flood Risk Assessment where one has been prepared; and
A site-specific flood risk assessment must demonstrate that the development
will be safe for its lifetime taking account of the vulnerability of its users,
without increasing flood risk elsewhere, and, where possible, will reduce flood
risk overall.
4.4 Both elements of the test will have to be passed for development to be allocated or
permitted. The accompanying FRA prepared by BWB Consulting addresses the
requirements of the Exception Test.
8
Technical Guidance to the Framework
4.5 The Technical Guidance to the Framework provides further guidance on the use of
the Sequential and Exception Tests. It is the confirmed aim of the Sequential Test
to steer the development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding. The EA
Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and the EA Flood Maps for Planning should be
the starting point for the sequential test.
4.6 Flood Zones 2 and 3 are shown on the EA Flood Maps, with Zone 1 being all land
falling outside of Zones 2 and 3. Developments should be directed towards the
zones with the lowest floor risk where possible. Where there are no reasonable
available sites in Flood Zone 1, local planning authorities when allocating land in
Local Plans or determining planning applications for development at any particular
location, should take into account the flood risk vulnerability of land uses as set out
in Table 2 of the Framework’s Technical Guidance and consider reasonably
available sites in Flood Zone 2 applying the exceptions test if required. Only where
there are no reasonably available sites in Flood Zone 1 or 2 should the
sustainability of sites in Flood Zone 3 be considered, taking into account the flood
risk vulnerability of land uses and applying the exceptions test if required.
4.7 Table 1 – Flood Zones, of the technical guidance confirms the types of development
that are appropriate within each Flood Zone. There are no restrictions on the types
of land uses appropriate within Flood Zone 1. In Flood Zone 2, it is advised that
‘essential infrastructure’, ‘water compatible developments’, ‘less vulnerable’ and
‘more vulnerable’ uses are appropriate. ‘Highly vulnerable’ uses are only
appropriate in Zone 2 if the Exceptions Test is passed. In Flood Zone 3a ‘water
compatible’ and ‘less vulnerable’ uses are appropriate. ‘More vulnerable uses’
should only be permitted if the exception test is passed.
4.8 Table 2 – Flood Risk Vulnerability Classification, confirms that residential
development is a ‘more vulnerable use’. Residential development on the
Application Site is, therefore, only appropriate subject to the Sequential Test and
Exception Test being passed.
9
Broxtowe Borough Local Plan
4.9 Broxtowe Borough’s adopted planning policies are contained in the Broxtowe Local
Plan (2004) which will be gradually replaced over the coming years by new
Development Plan Documents in the Local Development Framework. The Local
Plan was adopted in September 2004 and is the main reference document for
forward planning in the Borough. It shows all the land allocated for development to
cover requirements up to 2011. It includes current planning policies against which
new development proposals are judged. However, The Plan’s policies must be read
in conjunction with the policies in the NPPF (The Framework). The weight afforded
to the policies in the local plan should be based on their consistency with The
Framework.
4.10 Local Plan Policy E28 advises that:
“Planning permission will not be granted for development within the
High Flood Risk areas shown on the Proposals Map, and within other parts
of the catchments of the rivers Trent and Erewash, which would increase
the risk of flooding.”
4.11 The policy allows for development in areas of flood risk provided that it ‘would not
increase the risk flooding’. The policy’s supporting text advises that the definition of
‘high’ flood risk can be found at Table 1, para 30 of PPG25, which provides guidance
about the acceptability of development in Flood Zone 3. Applications for
development in these areas will need to be accompanied by a flood risk
assessment to demonstrate how the risk of flooding can be satisfactorily
addressed. The flood outline shown on the Proposals Map does not take
account of the completed River Trent flood defences; they should be taken into
account when considering the related flood risk.
4.12 The relevant extract from the Local Plan Proposals Map is set out below. It should be
noted that PPG25 has now been superseded by the guidance in The Framework and
the accompanying Technical Guidance. Therefore the references in the Policy to
PPG25 are out of date.
10
Figure 1 – Local Plan Proposals Map Extract
Broxtowe Borough Aligned Core Strategy
4.13 Broxtowe District Council have submitted a Core Strategy to the Secretary of State for
Examination. The Examination has now been completed. At the close of the Core
Strategy Examination Hearing Sessions, the Inspector issued a letter requesting
additional work to be done by the Local Authority before the Core Strategy can be
progressed towards adoption. In response to this letter Broxtowe are considering
modifications to the Core Strategy and intend to notify the Inspector of their response
in due course.
4.14 As the Core Strategy is not adopted it carries limited weight in the decision making
process. It is, however, noted that Policy 1 -Climate Change, of the submission draft
plan advises:
11
“Development proposals that avoid areas of current and future flood risk and
which do not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere and where possible reduce
flood risk, adopting the precautionary principle, will be supported.
Where no reasonable site within Flood Zone 1 is available, allocations in Flood
Zone 2 and Flood Zone 3 will be considered on a sequential basis.
Where it is necessary to apply the Exception Test within the urban areas, the
following factors will taken into account when considering if development has
wider sustainability benefits to the community that outweigh flood risk:
a) there are exceptional and sustainable circumstances for locating the
development within such areas, including the necessary re-use of brownfield
sites; and
b) the risk can be fully mitigated by engineering and design measures.”
4.15 Whilst Policy 1 of the emerging Core Strategy is not an adopted policy its guidance
on development in areas of flood risk is closely aligned to the guidance the
Framework.
Broxtowe Site Allocations Issues and Options Discussion Document
4.16 Broxtowe Council undertook public consultation on the 'Issues and Options' Site
Allocation document in December2013/January2014. When adopted, the Site
Allocations Document will replace the Saved Policies of the existing Broxtowe Local
Plan. This new plan will align to policies within the Core Strategy.
4.17 Section 6 – Main Built Up Area Allocations. This chapter of the document identifies
potential locations for residential and commercial development in Beeston and the
other key settlements of Stapleford, Attenborough, Bramcote, Chilwell, Toton and
Nuthall East & Strelley wards. Given that the Site Allocations document is in the
early stages of preparation it can be afforded limited weight as a policy document at
the present time. However, the potential locations for development identified by the
Issues and Options consultation draft document have been used to inform the
sequential site search and the availability of alternative development locations.
12
4.18 The application site is identified as site H499 – Beeston Business Park, Technology
Drive, Beeston. It is advised that:
“Part of a wider former telecoms site and Enterprise Zone (EZ), could come forward in the near future as some form of mixed development (in discussion) although timescales remain unresolved. No significant constraints to residential development expected on the South Eastern quadrant of the site for 200 homes. Further work required to demonstrate delivery in 0-5 years.”
Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) 2012
4.19 The Broxtowe SHLAA was published in March 2012. The purpose of SHLAA is to
identify sites which may have the potential to accommodate new housing
development. The study assesses sites to establish their suitability, availability and
achievability and forms part of the evidence base that will be used to inform the
emerging Local Development Framework (LDF).
4.20 The SHLAA includes land that has come forward from a range of sources, including
sites that have already been granted planning permission and sites that have been
put forward by landowners and developers. The SHLAA has been used to inform the
sequential test by identifying potential alternative locations for development.
13
5.0 SCOPE OF SEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT
5.1 Prior to the preparation of the sequential test Broxtowe Council were contacted in
order to establish the scope of the report. A letter was sent to Ms Emma Palmer-
Barnes on the 8th December 2013 setting out the proposed scope for the sequential
test. The letter suggested that the sequential test report adopted the following
approach to identify the availability of alternative sites:
1) Sites within defined settlement boundaries are sequentially preferable locations
for development than sites outside of the defined settlement boundaries in
accordance with the requirements of Local Plan Policy H7.
.
2) The majority of the site is brownfield, the greenfield parcel of land on the southern
edge of the site to the south of Trent Vale Road which will be used mainly for
sports pitches with a small section intended for residential. Greenfield sites are,
therefore, sequentially less preferable locations for development compared to the
application site.
3) The uses cannot be desegregated because a comprehensive approach to the
regeneration of the site is required. The sequential test will, therefore, consider
alternative sites which are large enough to accommodate the whole of the
proposed development.
4) Alternative sites should have the required infrastructure and be in a location
which is suitable for accommodating the range of proposed uses.
5.2 The scope of the sequential test was also discussed with the Case Officer during
the course of a pre-application meeting. The case officer advised that the sequential
test for Boots and Severn Trent strategic site should be used to help inform the
sequential test for the Beeston Business Park. Section 8 – Alternative Sites, part b)
Criteria for Search, of the sequential test report for the Boots and Severn Trent site
(December 2011) advises that the Boots and Severn Trent site was identified as a
strategic site by the LPA due to its:
Size and critical mass in supporting housing (Policies 4, 7 of ACS)
Brownfield status and regeneration potential (Policy & ACS)
Nil impact on Green Belt (Policy 3 ACS)
14
Sustainability and proximity to existing infrastructure, services and
communities (Policies 2,14,15,18 of ACS)
5.3 The Boots and Severn Trent site shares a number of characteristics with the
Beeston Business Park, albeit the Boots and Severn Trent site is significantly larger
than the application site (124ha). They are in close proximity to one another; the
Boots and Severn Trent site lies to the north east of the application site separated
by an area of residential development. Both proposals will have no impact on the
Green Belt. Both developments comprise a mixed use development providing
residential and commercial development.
5.4 The sequential test for the Boots and Severn Trent site looked for alternative sites
within the administrative areas of Broxtowe Borough Council and Nottingham City
Council. This approach reflected the size and location of the site which straddles
both Local Authority areas. Advice was provided at the pre-application meeting that
the sequential search for the Beeston Business Park site should be restricted to the
administrative area of Broxtowe Borough Council.
5.5 In preparing the sequential test for the Boots and Severn Trent site, sites were
selected which were equal to or greater in size than Nottingham City’s and
Broxtowe Borough’s strategic allocations. A similar approach has been adopted for
this sequential search. Sites that are not of sufficient size to accommodate the
proposed development have been dismissed. In order to adopt a robust approach
sites that are 15.7ha in size (80% the size of the application site area) or greater
site have been assessed.
15
6.0 THE SEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT
6.1 The sequential assessment has been prepared in order to establish if there are any
sequentially preferable sites available for the proposed development based on the
approach to site selection identified in Chapter 5 of this report. The Council’s Site
Allocations Issues and Options Discussion Document and SHLAA have been used
to identify potential alternative locations for development as agreed with officers at
pre-application meetings.
6.2 Paragraph M6.1.5 of the Site Allocations Issues and Options advises that the sites
listed in the table on pages 45 to 47 of the document are potential development
sites identified by the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment. This list of
sites has, therefore, been used to help identify alternative locations for the proposed
development. Sites identified in the table that follows paragraph M6.1.5 of the Site
Allocations Issues and Options have been excluded from the assessment if they fall
below the lower size search threshold (15.7ha). Alternative sites within Broxtowe
Borough Council which were identified by the Boots and Severn Trent site
sequential test have also been reassessed for their suitability.
6.3 Sites identified in Table 4 – Green Belt Sites, of the Site Allocations Issues and
Options Discussion document are not considered to be sequentially preferable
locations for development due to their Green Belt Status. The development of
Green Belt sites is prevented by the NPPF unless ‘very special circumstances’ can
be demonstrated. For completeness and ease of reference these Green Belt sites
have, however, been identified in Table 1 – Assessment Sites, below.
6.4 Table 1 below identifies and assesses the suitability of alternative sites based upon
the approach identified in the ‘Scope of Sequential Assessment’ (chapter No.5) of
this report; it also follows the approach in Table 1 of the Boots and Severn Trent
Sequential Site Search.
16
Table 1 – Assessment Sites
Site Reference Number
Site Name Size Flood Zone Reasonably Available
Site Suitability
Outside Green Belt
PDL Regeneration Opportunities
Transport Services Sustainability
Overall Assessment
1 Boots (Nottingham) and Boots and Severn Trent Land
125ha Flood Zone 3 Potentially available, however Issues and Options Site Allocations Document advises the site is not available for 6 + years
Yes Yes Yes Good The site may not be immediately available. The site incomparable in size to the application site. It is close to 7 times larger than the application site. The site is in the same flood zone as the application site and is not, therefore, sequentially preferable. - Dismiss
2 Field Farm, Stapleford
28 ha Part of the site is within the functional floodplain (Zone 3b) of Boundary Brook and part is within the 1 in 100 year floodplain (Zone 3a)
Yes Yes No No– The site is greenfield. The Issues and Options Site Allocations DPD advises that the site will not provide any notable employment opportunities
Good The site is greenfield. The Issues and Options Site Allocations DPD advises that there is no commercial land proposed. It will not have the same regeneration and job creation benefits as the application site.. The site is in the same flood zone as the application site and is not, therefore, sequentially preferable. - Dismiss
3 Land in the vicinity of the proposed HS2 station at Toton
73ha Site within Flood Zone 1
Unknown, planning application submitted on part of site. Landowner intentions not known.
Yes No Regeneration potential with HS2
Good The site is greenfield and therefore a sequentially less preferable location for development. Availability of site uncertain, planning application submitted but not determined. The site is incomparable in size (close to 4 times larger) compared to the application site. - Dismiss
17
4 The Boots Company Beeston site
18.6ha EA Maps suggest over 1/2 site is in Flood Zone 2 (1 in 100 or greater)
Unknown - Site in employment use, tenancies and lease agreement not known. Issues and Options Site Allocations document advises site will not be available until the medium term.
Yes Yes Limited - Issues and Options Site Allocations DPD advises that the site will not provide any employment opportunities
The Site Allocations Issues and Options document advises that there are highways capacity issues at peak times
Site potentially unavailable. Site is likely to be contaminated and remediation would be required. Highways constraints to be resolved. - Dismiss
5 Land off Moss Drive Bramcote
23.7ha 1 Yes No Site predomin-antly greenfield
Limited Good Green Belt and predominantly greenfield site. The Local Plan Review 2003 Inspector considered that developing the South of the site would create unrestricted urban sprawl, and as the land is best and most versatile agricultural land the site is undesirable for development. Development of the Northern part of the site would be prominent when viewed from the South creating significant encroachment into the countryside which would poorly relate to the built form of Bramcote. - Dismiss
6 Land Between A52 Stapleford And Chilwell Lane
34.7ha 1 Yes No No None Good Green Belt site. Constraints include noise issues from the A52, exposed site on rising land , rights of way through the site and adjacent land needed for acceptable access. If the site were developed in its entirety it would physically link Chilwell to Stapleford creating coalescence. - Dismiss
18
6 Land at Woodhouse Way Nuthall
32.4ha 1 Yes No No None Issues and options Allocations DPD advises that there is sufficient road network capacity
Green Belt site. Mainly good quality agricultural land. Considered for employment in the Local Plan Inquiry 2003. Inspector concluded development would represent a major encroachment and coalescence risk.Tribal SUE report also concluded the site to be unsuitable due to coalescence risk. Part of site a designated Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. - Dismiss
7 Land at Wheatgrass Farm Chilwell
28.9ha 1 Yes No No None Ok Green Belt site. Existing footpaths may need to be diverted to allow for development, NET route would limit development but will act as a defensible boundary. The Tribal SUE was less in favour of development on the East side of Toton Lane due in part to the prominent rising land in this area. Power lines cross the site. Local Plan Review 2003 Inspector concluded that the site, even if it is less sensitive than other parts of this open area, is an important and integral area of countryside. The Inspector also recognised importance of site for recreational purposes. - Dismiss
19
8 Toton Sidings Derby Road Stapleford
20.3ha EA flood risk maps suggests that more than half the site is in flood zone 2
No - access constraint
No Yes Limited Site Allocations Issues and Options document advises no easy road access. But will gain access to A52 as part of HS2 hub station
Green Belt in the Broxtowe Local Plan (2004) but identified as a Major Developed Site indicating the potential for some redevelopment. Other constraints include flood zone and SINC. The former sidings use would require remediation and access to the site is only realistically possible through site 133 to the North of Toton. In the absence of development on site 133 this site is considered to be undeliverable and undevelopable within the plan period. - Dismiss
9 Field Farm Land north of Ilkeston Road Stapleford
27.9ha 1 Yes No No None Good The site is in the Green Belt. There are Tree Protection Orders on site proposed to be retained and 39 per cent of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land. - Dismiss
10 Land at Toton Lane Stapleford
41.5ha 1 Yes No No None Good Part of a narrow Green Belt gap (mixed Grade 2, 3b and 3a agricultural land) between Toton and Stapleford. - Dismiss
11 Land Between Elton And The Woodards Bilborough Road Trowell
26.3ha 1 Yes No No None Good The site is located within the Green Belt, adjacent to Bilborough Road and in part the settlement of Bilborough in Nottingham City.-Dismiss
12 Spring Farm Nottingham Road Trowell Moor Trowell
69.3ha 1 Yes No No None Moderate access to services and facilities
The site is located within the Green Belt. The recent publication of the preferred route for a High Speed 2 Railway shows the line to dissect the North West corner of the site which could create noise issues and reduce the developable space. - Dismiss
20
13 Land off Coventry Lane Bramcote
108ha 1 Unknown, Site Allocations Issues and Options document advises complex site with multiple ownership issues
No No None Good Green Belt land. Availability uncertain. Local Plan Review 2003 Inspector concluded the development of the site would extend into the open countryside which would be a major intrusion into pleasantly rolling landscape. Development would be poorly related to the existing urban form and would involve the loss of a substantial amount of Best and Most Versatile agricultural land. - Dismiss
14 Chetwynd Barracks, Chetwynd Road, Chilwell
75.8ha 1 No Yes Yes In theory, however in practise there is no immediate prospect of a release of land by the MoD .
Good in principle
Site unavailable. Incomparable in size to application site.- Dismiss
15 North of Gilt Hill, Kimberley
113.9ha 1 Yes No No No Poor Green Belt greenfield site. Incomparable in size to application site.- Dismiss
16 Bennerley Disposal Point and land between A610 and Gin Close Way, Awsworth
63.7ha 1 Yes No Partly Partly Poor Green Belt greenfield site. - Dismiss
17 East of motorway/north of Long Lane, Watnall
91.4ha 1 Yes No Partly Partially Poor Green Belt site, incomparable in size to application site – dismiss.
18 South west of motorway, north east of Mina Road, Watnall
112.9ha 1 Yes No No No Poor Green Belt, greenfield site, incomparable in size to application site – dismiss.
19 Shortwood Farm, Trowell
172ha 1 Yes No No No Poor Green Belt, greenfield site, incomparable in size to application site – dismiss.
20 Robbinetts, Awsworth
109.3ha 1 Yes No No No Poor Green Belt, greenfield site, incomparable in size to application site – dismiss.
21
6.5 As demonstrated by Table 1 - Assessment Sites, there are no suitable alternative
locations for the proposed development on land of a lower flood risk. In addition,
when considering alternative locations for development it is also necessary to
consider whether there are exceptional and sustainable circumstances to support
development on the Application Site.
6.6 The mix of uses proposed by the planning application will assist with scheme viability.
The proposed development will result in the retention of existing employment
buildings and the creation of new employment uses which will encourage job creation
and job retention in the area. Broxtowe Borough Council is considering options for
accommodating the strategic housing requirement and it is acknowledged that this
could result in development within the Green Belt. The proposals on the Application
Site include c200 residential units on a brownfield site which will be sequentially
preferably to land within the Green Belt. This is a significant material consideration in
the determination of the planning application.
22
7.0 CONCLUSIONS
7.1 This Flood Risk Sequential Assessment report has been prepared to accompany a
planning application proposing a mixed use redevelopment of land at Beeston
Business Park. The planning application site is a predominantly previously
developed site that extends to some 19.6 hectares (48.6 acres).The planning
application has been submitted as a ‘hybrid’ planning application. Outline planning
permission is sought for the residential element and full planning permission is
sought for the commercial element..
7.2 The Council’s Issues and Options Land Allocations consultation document, SHLAA
and the Boots and Severn Trent sequential test have been used to identify potential
alternative locations for development. This approach has been agreed with Council
Officers. The identified alternative sties have been assessed against the site
search criteria which is described in Chapter 5 of this Report.
7.3 Twenty potential alternative locations were identified for further assessment. All
twenty sites were found to be less sequentially preferable locations for development
compared to the application site. This is due to a variety of reasons, ranging from
the sites being in the same category of flood risk, their lack of availability and Green
Belt status. In summary, the land at the Beeston Business Park is considered to be
the most sequentially preferable location for the proposed development available.
Top Related