Retail and Town Centre Local Plan - wakefield.gov.uk documents/RTC Adopted SA Report App… ·...

Local Development Framework

www.wakefield.gov.uk/ldf

A N E W V I S I O N F O R D E V E L O P I N G W A K E F I E L D D I S T R I C T

Sustainability Appraisal Report -Appendices

Retail and Town CentreLocal Plan

Sustainability Appraisal Report -Appendices

Retail and Town CentreLocal Plan

Andrew Wallhead, Corporate DirectorRegeneration and Economic Growth Wakefield Council January 2017

Retail and Town Centre Local Plan - Adopted Sustainability Appraisal Report Appendices

Wakefield local Development Framework, January 2017 3

Contents Page

Introduction………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… 4

Appendix A: Sustainability Appraisal Consultation Responses……………………………………… 5

Appendix B: Appraisal of Policy Options………………………………………………………………………. 12

Appendix C: Appraisal of Site Options..……………………………………………………………………….. 128

Appendix D: Schedule of Pre-Submission Amendments to Final SA Report…………………… 234

Appendix E: Examination Modifications to Final Sustainability Appraisal Report………….. 237



Introduction

This Appendix document brings together all the appendices and annexes produced as part of the

Sustainability Appraisal process of the Leisure, Recreation and Open Space Local Plan.



Appendix A: Sustainability Appraisal Report Consultation Responses

Scoping Consultation Responses

Comment Reference

Consultee Comment Action

rtcsa4 English Heritage SA Objective 11 covers four areas, some unrelated and, more importantly, not all of which are necessarily compatible with one another. These are:- (1) A quality built environment which protects and enhances its heritage assets, (2) Efficient land use patterns, and (3) Minimisation of travel (4) The promotion of balanced development The problem with using a “composite” SA objective such as this is that positive outcomes from one part of this Objective could have a negative outcome against another part of it with the resultant effect that, overall, it would score no adverse impact (because the positive and negative effects would cancel one another out). One of the requirements of Annex 1 of the SEA Directive is to assess the likely significant effects which the plan might have upon “cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage”. Given that this is specifically referred to as a distinct element of any SEA appraisal, the SA should have a distinct SA Objective relating to the historic environment. We suggest that a new Objective is added along the following lines:- “To conserve and enhance the historic environment”

SA11 was developed as part of the wider LDF SA framework in earlier consultation with English Heritage. These SA objectives have been tested against the Core Strategy and Development Policies objectives, which specifically recognise the importance of cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage, and were found to be compatible. The RTC Local Plan will be prepared in conformity with the existing policies and Strategies in the LDF. As such, it is considered that the likely significant effects can be adequately assessed using the existing SA objectives. Therefore, no changes are recommended in the interests of maintaining a consistent set of SA objectives throughout the LDF process.

rtcsa5 English Heritage Whilst this is a good overview of the heritage assets of the Wakefield area as a whole, in order to assess how this Local Plan is preforming in terms of its Policies and proposals, ideally there ought to be a breakdown of the numbers of heritage assets in the parts of Wakefield which are covered by this plan. This Section should also make mention of the fact that the latest English Heritage “Heritage at Risk Register” identifies three buildings, five churches, and six Scheduled Monuments, and the Registered Park and

Noted. It is recommended that the Baseline Characterisation and Key Issues are updated to reflect this. The RTC plan is a district wide plan and as such potentially encompasses all of the heritage assets within the district. Through the GIS analysis associated with the appraisal of policies and proposals, any impact on the heritage assets will be



Comment Reference


Garden at Bretton Hall as being at risk. assessed.

rtcsa6 English Heritage It will not always be clear what impact a particular Policy or development of a site might have upon an SA Objective. In many cases, it will depend upon how that policy is implemented or the site developed. Consequently, there should be a category which deals with this eventuality.

The possibility of uncertain effects arising from the plan in relation to SA objectives is recognised in chapter 7. The acknowledgement of uncertain effects will continue to be a feature of the SA, as policies and proposals are developed and assessed through the SA. Chapter 8 recognises the need to monitor the uncertainties in the plan, in relation to the SA objectives, as it is implemented

rtcsa7 English Heritage It is unclear how these criteria will be used to assess the Policy framework since (one would suspect) many of the Policies are unlikely to result in specific site allocations.

Paragraph 6.6 indicates that policy options, rather than site proposals, will be assessed against the SA Objectives. At this stage chapter 7 details how this has been carried out to date for the Local Plan objectives.

rtcsa8 English Heritage It would be far better to state that “the allocation is unlikely to have any significant effects upon either the natural or historic environment”

Noted. The scoring criteria for individual site proposals will be considered for review as part of the next stage of developing the SA and options.

rtcsa9 English Heritage The approach to assessing the impacts upon the historic environment is somewhat confusing and does not reflect what is set out in the NPPF. Just because a development is within a heritage asset does not necessarily mean that it will harm it. The key issue is what effect the proposal will have upon the significance of that asset. In the case of the historic environment it is suggested that this is amended to read:- “The proposal or Policy is likely to result in some harm to the significance of a heritage asset”

Noted. The scoring criteria for individual site proposals will be considered for review as part of the next stage of developing the SA and options.

rtcsa10 English Heritage The approach to assessing the impacts upon the historic environment is somewhat confusing and does not reflect what is set out in the NPPF. Just because a development is within a heritage asset does not necessarily

Noted. The scoring criteria for individual site proposals will be considered for review as part of the next stage of developing the SA



Comment Reference


mean that it will harm it. The key issue is what effect the proposal will have upon the significance of that asset. In the case of the historic environment it is suggested that this is amended to read:- “The proposal or Policy is likely to result in substantial harm to elements which contribute to the significance of a heritage asset”

and options.

rtcsa11 English Heritage In terms of the historic environment (one element of SA Objective 11), the potential impact of Local Plan Objectives 2, 3, 4 and 5 at this stage is uncertain. We would suggest that since several of Wakefield’s town centres are centred around historic cores, often with large numbers of Listed Buildings an additional Objective is added to the plan along the following lines:- “To reinforce and enhance the distinctive character of the town centres and to ensure that their historic assets are conserved.”

It is considered that SA11 is adequate and consistent with the SA methodology and framework of the wider LDF in relation to protecting, preserving and enhancing the historic environment. Objectives 1-5 of the local plan are considered to be compatible with SA11. Objective 1 specifically refers to promoting the principles of sustainable development in the NPPF, which includes protecting and enhancing the built and historic environment. This principle is present within the wider LDF.

rtcsa12 English Heritage English Heritage strongly advises that the conservation staff of the Council together with those at WYAS are closely involved throughout the preparation of the SA of this SPD. They are best placed to advise on; local historic environment issues and priorities, including access to data held in the HER (formerly SMR); how the policy or proposal can be tailored to minimise potential adverse impacts on the historic environment; the nature and design of any required mitigation measures; and opportunities for securing wider benefits for the future conservation and management of historic assets.

Noted and agreed. Further specific consultation events are to be arranged.

rtcsa1 English Heritage Several of Wakefield’s town centres have historic cores, often with large numbers of Listed Buildings. These heritage assets help make each of the town centres distinctive and contribute to the quality of the shopping experience. The need to ensure that the strategy not only safeguards these

The need to preserve, promote and enhance culture and heritage through the RTC Local Plan is acknowledged in SA objective 7 of the SA framework, which has been tested



Comment Reference


assets but also, where possible, enhances them should be recognised as one of the Issues the plan needs to address.

against the objectives of the RTC Local Plan. Objective 1 of the RTC Local Plan refers to the principles of sustainable development in NPPF, which includes protecting and enhancing the built and historic environment. This is a consistent theme running through the LDF.

rtcsa2 & rtca3

Mr David V Mitchell

While this plan tries to imagine an ideal world (or at least Wakefield MDC) the failure to acknowledge the lack of frequent public transport needed to create vibrant town centres by getting the population from their suburbs to the retailers and back in reasonable time frames necessitates the use of the car. For larger town centres to survive the car must be let back in, or a very frequent bus service from all parts of the District must be a very high priority.

The accessibility of sites/proposals forms part of the SA framework and methodology. The RTC Local Plan poses a number of specific questions (15, 16 and 17) to address car parking issues.

rtcsa13 Theatres Trust We support the document. The Scoping Report will encourage the creation of policies linked to clear objectives which means that progress towards those objectives can be monitored as The Theatres Trust wishes to be assured that the Local Plans are robust enough to include specific guidance on protecting and encouraging arts and cultural provision. We are pleased that the Baseline Information for Cultural Heritage on page 33 includes the ‘well-established’ Theatre Royal

Comment noted. No action required

rtcsa15 Environment Agency

The Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (SFRA) 2008 is out of date. Mapping has taken place for the Calder Valley, however the SFRA has not been updated. Please consult Wakefield Drainage department on any latest flood risk information.

Comments noted. The baseline information, framework and methodology will be updated accordingly. Wakefield Drainage are consulted as standard as part of the LDF process.


The SA Methodology table makes reference to the below under ‘Environmental Other’: ‘The site is located partly within Strategic Flood Risk Area Zone 3 or

Comments noted. The baseline information, framework and methodology will be updated accordingly.



Comment Reference


washland, or wholly within a SFRA Zone 2’ ‘The site is located wholly within Strategic Flood Risk Area Zone 3 or washland’ The term ‘washland’ is redundant and is not used in a planning sense. It is also not mentioned in the SFRA. The term ‘functional flood plain’ is defined as land where water has to flow or be stored in times of flood.


In section 7 the document includes a table that has reference to local plan objectives LP1 -5. It would be useful if this document included the text of these objectives for reference to save having to refer back to the Local Plan document.

Noted. Consider amending table.

rtcsa14 Health and Safety Executive

We have concluded that we have no representation to make at this stage of your local planning process. This is because there is insufficient information in the consultation documents on the location and use class of sites that could be developed. In the absence of this information, the HSE is unable to give advice regarding the compatibility of future developments within the consultation zones of major hazard installations and MAHPs located in the area of your local plan.

Comment noted. The SA framework allows for the consideration of the implications of HSE consultation zones going forward.

Initial SA Consultation Responses

Comment Reference

Consultee Comment Action/Response

RTCCDSA1

English Heritage (Mr Ian Smith)

As you will be aware from our response to the Scoping Report, had reservations about the approach that was proposed to be used to evaluate the impact of this DPD. However, given the nature of the document, we would agree with the conclusions of the Initial SA regarding the impact which this DPD is likely to have upon the historic environment. Where harm has been identified, we would

Noted, no further action required



Comment Reference

Consultee Comment Action/Response

endorse the mitigation measures which it puts forward to reduce that harm.

RTCCDSA2 Environment Agency (Gaffar Abdul)

We have no further comments to make on the Sustainability Appraisal to those already made previously.

Noted, no further action required

Final Sustainability Appraisal Report Consultation Responses

Comment

Reference

Consultee Do you agree

with the Final

SA

Comment Action/Response

rtcSubSA2 West Yorkshire

Archaeology

Advisory

Service (Mr Ian

Sanderson)

Yes Re SA11.Welcome drawing the attention of would-be developers

to the historic significance of the District's major centres but

would hesitate to spot-light Castleford over & above Pontefract

or Wakefield centres, all of which have very significant elements

as well. Would suggest replacing "in particular within Castleford"

with the statement that "Wakefield's, Pontefract's and

Castleford's centres all have a very significant historic interest.

Therefore, development schemes will need...."

Noted. This was reference to there

being a greater number of possible

development sites being identified in

Castleford, than in the other centres,

rather than giving any elevated

status to the centre itself. However,

the wording can be revised to clarify

this.

rtcSubSA3 Historic

England (Mr

Ian Smith)

Yes Given the nature of the document that is being assessed and the

proposals that this Plan is putting forward, we would agree with

the conclusions of the Sustainability Appraisal regarding the likely

impact which this DPD is likely to have upon the historic

environment. Where harm has been identified, we would

Noted. No further action required at

this time.



endorse the mitigation measures which it puts forward to reduce

that harm.

We should like to stress that this opinion is based on the

information provided by you in the document accompanying

your letter dated 15 October, 2015.To avoid any doubt, this does

not affect our obligation to provide further advice and,

potentially, object to specific proposals which may subsequently

arise (either as a result of this consultation or in later versions of

the Plan) where we consider that, despite the SA/SEA, these

would have an adverse effect upon the historic environment.

rtcSubSA3 Environment Agency (Rachel Jones)

Yes We have no further comments to make on the Sustainability Appraisal.

Noted Given the changes made to the baseline data and SA objectives for the Leisure, Recreation and Open Space Local Plan as a result of the EAs comments on the Final SA for that plan, it is considered that the data and objectives should also be updated in the RTC Final SA Report as set out below in Appendix B.



Appendix B: Policy Options

Key to Abbreviations

Overall Compatibility and Magnitude of Effect

Likelihood of effect Geographical Scale of Effect

√√ Very Sustainable H High G Global

√ Sustainable M Medium N National

− Neutral L Low R Regional

? Uncertain SR Sub Regional

× Unsustainable D District Wide

×× Very unsustainable L Localised to settlement or area

Permanence of Effect Definition of Timescales

T Temporary Short Term 0-10 years

P Permanent Medium Term 10-20 years

Long Term After the life of the plan



Initial Sustainability Appraisal Policy Options

Option: RTC116 (New Policy RTC1)

Saved UDP Policy S1: Retail Development in Town Centres - Accepted

SA Reference

SA Objectives Effects Commentary /Explanation (to include secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects)

Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic

SA1 Good quality employment opportunities available to all

√√ √√ √√ P H D Encouraging appropriate retail in existing centres will support local employment opportunities accessible by public transport.

SA2 Conditions which enable business success, economic growth and investment

√√ √√ √√ P M D Encouraging retail in existing centres encourages inward investment and support the increase in retail floor space in appropriate locations.

Social

SA3 Education and training opportunities to build skills and capacities

√ √ √ P M D Local employment should provide on-the-job training opportunities

SA4 Conditions and services to engender good health

− − − P M D



SA5 Safety and security for people and property

√ √ √ P M D Town centre vibrancy is likely to support town centre safety and security

SA6 Vibrant communities to participate in decision making

√ √ √ P M D Town centre regeneration will support community vibrancy

SA7 Create, enhance and provide accessibility to culture, leisure and recreation activities

√ √ √ P M D An increase in shopping offer would increase the potential for this leisure opportunity.

SA8 Local needs met locally

√ √ √ P M D Would support increase and diversification of local retail services

SA9 Quality housing available to everyone

− − − P M D

Environmental

SA10 To provide a transport network which maximises access whilst minimising detrimental impacts

√ √ √ P M D Locating retail in town centres will reduce the need to travel to access shops and provide opportunities for greater use of public transport

SA11 A quality built environment that protects and enhances its historic assets, and efficient land use patterns that make good use of derelict sites, minimise travel and promote balanced

√ √ √ P M D Supporting retail in town centres will support the quality of the built/historic environment of town centres and minimise the need to travel.



development

SA12 A bio-diverse and attractive natural environment

− − − P M D

SA13 Minimal pollution levels

√ √ √ P M D Reduced need to travel to access shops

SA14 Minimal greenhouse gas emissions and a managed response to the effects of climate change

√ √ √ P M D Reduced need to travel to access shops

SA15 Prudent and efficient use of energy and natural resources, with minimal production of waste

√ √ √ P M D Should make efficient use of previously developed land in central locations.

Option Conclusion & Mitigation / Alternatives

This option encourages retail development in the retail policy areas of town centres and other recognised retail centres at a scale appropriate to the needs of the area, subject to environmental considerations. This will encourage development of an appropriate type and scale in central locations. This would support local employment and training opportunities. The option supports town centre vitality and viability and supports community vibrancy. Central facilities reduce the need to travel by private car with positive benefits for air pollution, health, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change.




Saved UDP Policy S2 Retail Development on the Edge of Retail Policy Areas - Accepted

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P H D Will ensure that any new employment opportunities created are accessible by public transport


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will support inward investment and provide opportunities for an increase in retail floor space

Social


√ √ √ P H D New employment should provide on-the-job training opportunities


− − − P M D

SA5 Safety and security for people and

− − − P M D



property


√ √ √ P M D Includes a requirement to consider the needs of people in affected areas through the decision making process


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Will provide locally accessible shopping by means other than the private car


− − − P H D

Environmental


√√ √√ √√ P M D Should ensure that shopping can be accessed by means other than the private car

SA11 A quality built environment that protects and enhances its historic assets, and efficient land use patterns that make good use of derelict sites, minimise travel and promote balanced development

√ √ √ P M D Should minimise the need to travel, make efficient use of land and provide opportunities to deliver a quality built environment.




− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Reducing the need to travel will reduce transport related air pollution


√ √ √ P M D Reducing the need to travel will reduce transport related greenhouse gas emissions


? ? ? T M D This may be dependent on the details of specific proposals


This option will ensure that edge of centre retail development is of an appropriate scale to individual centres and is well connected to those centres, to reduce the need to travel by non-car means. This will help support the vitality and viability of existing retail centres and reduce transport related air pollution/greenhouse gas emissions. Where proposals are on land allocated for other uses, it may be relevant to consider including the requirement for an impact assessment, to provide flexibility in line with current national planning policy. It is also recommended that the need for adopting a sequential approach be included or cross referenced with NPPF para. 24 and core strategy policy CS2.

Option: RTC118

Saved UDP Policy S3: Out-of-Centre Retail Development - Rejected

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect



Economic


√ √ √ P H D Will ensure that new employment created can be accessed by means other than the private car


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will provide a flexible approach for the consideration of out-of-centre retail development without undermining the vitality and viability of existing retail centres

Social


√ √ √ T M D New employment should provide on-the-job-training opportunities


− − − P M D


− − − P M D




− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Should ensure that out-of-centre retail development is accessible by means other than the private car


− − − P M D



Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Should ensure that any out-of-centre retail development is accessible by means other than the car


√ √ √ P M D Should ensure efficient use of land within the urban area, minimising the need to travel.


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Should help minimise transport related air pollution by reducing the need to travel by private car


√ √ √ P M D Should help to minimise transport related greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the need to travel by private car




? ? ? T M D This will be dependent on the details of individual retail proposals


This option will help to ensure that any out of centre retail development is accessible by non-car means and would not undermine the vitality and viability of existing retail centres. This will help to manage transport related pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Where development is proposed on land allocated for other uses it may be relevant to consider including the requirement for an impact assessment in line with national policy. It may also be relevant to relate such a policy to other main town centre uses as well in parallel with policy CS2 and NPPF.


Saved UDP Policy S4: Local Shops – Accepted

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M D Supporting the development of appropriate local shopping facilities will provide small scale local employment opportunities

SA2 Conditions which enable business success, economic growth and

√√ √√ √√ P M D Supporting the development of appropriate local shopping facilities will help encourage inward investment and inward invest



investment

Social


√ √ √ P M D Small scale local employment should provide some opportunity for on the job training.


√ √ √ P M D Access to local shops with good quality fresh produce will help address health inequalities within the district


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Good quality local facilities will help to support community vibrancy


− − − P M D


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will support the development of accessible local shopping facilities without the need to use the private car


− − − P M D

Environmental

SA10 To provide a transport network which maximises access whilst

√√ √√ √√ P H D Will reduce the need to travel to access essential shopping facilities



minimising detrimental impacts


√ √ √ P M D Will minimise the need to travel and contribute to the quality of the built environment in local areas


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Minimising the need to travel will help address transport related air pollution


√ √ √ P M D Minimising the need to travel will help address transport related greenhouse gas emissions


− − − P M D




Supporting the development of appropriate local shops will support local community vibrancy, support the local economy and provide local employment opportunities. Local shops can also help to address health inequalities by providing locally accessible high quality fresh produce. Local shopping facilities will also help to reduce transport related air pollution/greenhouse gas emissions will positive benefits for health and climate change.


Saved UDP Policy S5: Promotion of Town Centres (Accepted)

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M D Supporting town centre regeneration will support job creation


√√ √√ √√ P H D Supporting town centre regeneration will stimulate inward investment, and the reuse of vacant retail and office floor space

Social


√ √ √ P M D On-the-job training opportunities should be available with new employment opportunities




√ √ √ P M D Will support the delivery of health facilities in accessible locations


√ √ √ P M D Improving the urban environment will provide opportunities for designing out crime and addressing locally specific concerns relating to crime and antisocial behaviour


√ √ √ P M D A co-ordinated approach to town centre regeneration offers good opportunities for community engagement and participation


√ √ √ P M D Co-ordinated investment offers strong opportunities to improve accessible CLR facilities


√ √ √ P M D Will support the delivery of locally accessible facilities without the need to travel, and will support the vibrancy of town centres


√ √ √ P M D Will support the delivery of town centre housing where appropriate

Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Will support improvements to accessibility through means other than the private car




√√ √√ √√ P M D Will support improvements to the quality of the urban environment, including heritage, transport , recuse of sites and access to CLR facilities


? ? ? T M D Has the potential to support improvements to the natural environment within town centres, such as town centre greening etc.


√ √ √ P M D Supporting improvements to pedestrian access and public transport will help to address transport related air and noise pollution.


√ √ √ P M D Will support the reduction in transport related greenhouse gas emissions and the inclusion of measures to address climate change in new development


? ? ? T M D Should make efficient re-use of brownfield land within town centres. May increase the generation of waste in town centres and energy usage. This would require a managed design and development response to deal with such eventualities.




This option would support inward investment, business success, and employment and training opportunities. It would also support improvements to the urban environment whilst protecting historic assets and providing good quality housing. This policy supports improvements to the pedestrian experience within towns and the accessibility of CLR activities, supporting vibrant communities. Public transport improvements will be supported by this policy, along with the reduction in air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. The management of waste generation and increased energy use as a result of an increase in town centre activity should be considered further.

Option: RTC121

Saved UDP Policy S6: Non-retail Uses in Primary Shopping Frontages

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


? ? ? T M D Employment opportunities will only be created if new retail is willing to locate in the town centre in primary shopping frontages


? ? ? T M D Whilst this option would support new retail development, it would restrict other potentially viable businesses that could make a positive contribution to town centre vitality and viability

Social


? ? ? T M D Increased training opportunities will be dependent on business success and job creation




− − − P M D


? ? ? T M D In areas with high vacancy rates, deterring other viable uses could be detrimental to the sense of safety and security in a given area


? ? ? T M D Community vibrancy will depend on the ability of the primary shopping frontage to attract viable new retail uses


√ √ √ P M D Supporting town centre retail will support access to shopping as a leisure activity


− − − P M D Accessible town centre retailing will help meet needs locally. However, deterring other potentially viable uses may be detrimental to community vibrancy where vacancy rates are high


− − − P M D

Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Will support town centre shopping accessible by public transport




? ? ? T M D This policy may deter the re-use of existing buildings for alternative viable uses where vacancy rates are high and there is no prospect or a return to retailing in the short to medium term. This may be detrimental to the quality of the built environment.


− − − T M D


√ √ √ P M D Centrally located retailing will help address transport related air pollution


√ √ √ P M D Retailing that is accessible by non-car means will help reduce transport related greenhouse gas emissions


− − − P M D




Whilst such a policy is required by NPPF, NPPF advocates greater flexibility to support new viable uses where it is unlikely that retail will return in the short to medium term. Recent research by GVA (2013) on retailing in the Wakefield district suggest that an element of flexibility is needed in the current economic climate Such flexibility could include the consideration of cafes, culture, leisure, recreation and community uses, to support town centre vibrancy, vitality and viability. The policy may also be adapted to the circumstances of individual centres (evidence from the RLTC study suggests that policies relating to the evening economy should be maintained and strengthened in the interests of social and environmental sustainability).


WMDC Non-retail Uses in Primary Shopping Frontages - Accepted

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M D This flexible approach will help support local businesses and thereby local employment opportunities.


√ √ √ P M D Will provide flexibility in uses to support town centre vitality and viability

Social




√ √ √ P M D On the job training opportunities should accompany employment opportunities


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D This policy may help to reduce vacancy rates and thereby the fear of crime, whilst securing an appropriate mix of retail / non-retail uses.


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Supporting town centre retail will support access to shopping as a leisure activity


√ √ √ P M D Will help support the provision of facilities in accessible town centre locations


− − − P M D

Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Will support town centre shopping accessible by public transport




√ √ √ P M D Will help support a wider range of uses to reduce vacancy rates and improve the quality of the built environment.


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Centrally located facilities will help address transport related air pollution


√ √ √ P M D facilities that are accessible by non-car means will help reduce transport related greenhouse gas emissions


− − − P M D




This policy does not clearly define which non-retail uses will be considered acceptable subject to the assessment criteria. The option potentially provides greater flexibility than the saved policy S6, to support new viable uses where it is unlikely that retail will return in the short to medium term. However, greater flexibility towards other culture, leisure, recreation and community uses, in the list of other such uses to be considered may further support town centre vibrancy, vitality and viability. The policy may also be adapted to the circumstances of individual centres (evidence from the RLTC study suggests that policies relating to the evening economy should be maintained and strengthened in the interests of social and environmental sustainability).


WMDC: Hot Food Take-Aways - Accepted

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


× × × P M D Deterring new businesses may reduce the creation of new local employment opportunities


× × × P M D May reduce the number of potential new takeaway businesses opening in the district, by reducing their potential customer base and, thereby, reducing their viability

Social




− − − P M D


√√ √√ √√ P M D Would reduce the convenience of access for school children to less healthy meal options, particularly at lunch time. This will help address overweight/obesity problems within the district


− − − P M D


− − − P M D


− − − P M D


?/- ?/- ?/- P M D May reduce local access to hot food takeaways


− − − P M D

Environmental


− − − P M D




√ √ √ P M D May have positive benefits in terms of protecting the character of a particular area.


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D May help to reduce localised issues of noise, odour and litter


?/- ?/- ?/- P M D Restricting local provision may encourage people to travel further to access such facilities, increasing transport related greenhouse gas emissions


− − − P M D


This option may be detrimental to the potential for new business development. However, it would have a positive impact for the health of local school children, by restricting their access to less healthy meal options at lunch times. However, by restricting the introduction of local facilities, where there may be a market, it may encourage people to travel greater distances to access such provision. This may have knock-on implications for transport related pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

Option: RTC124

Retail Hierarchy - Accepted



(New Policy RTC6)

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M D Will help support locally accessible employment opportunities


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will encourage inward investment, and development that is appropriate in scale, type and location

Social


√ √ √ P H D On-the-job training opportunities should be available with any new employment opportunities


?/- ?/- ?/- T M D May support the delivery of new local healthcare facilities in appropriate locations




− − − P M D


?/- ?/- ?/- P M D May support provision of appropriate new community facilities


√ √ √ T M D May support the provision of appropriate new CLR activities. But these are likely to be limited to higher tier centres


√ √ √ P M D Will help to provide a framework for the provision of accessible essential services and support the vibrancy of local centres


− − − P M D

Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Should help support the local provision of essential services accessible by sustainable transport modes


√√ √√ √√ P M D Should help support local distinctiveness and improvements to the built environment



development


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Locally accessible services should help to address transport related pollution


√ √ √ P M D Should support a reduction in transport related greenhouse gas emissions


?/- ?/- ?/- T M D Should help make efficient use of brownfield land. The impact on renewables and waste management will depend on individual developments and the management of individual centres.


This option would help support the economy of individual centres and ensure any new development is appropriate to those centres. It should support improvements to the quality of the built environment in centres, along with the provision of locally accessible services. This will benefit transport, pollution and climate change. However, the delivery of any benefits will be somewhat dependent on the management of centres, initiatives and development proposals coming forward.

Option: RTC125

WMDC Retail Hierarchy

SA SA Objectives Effects Commentary /Explanation (to include secondary, cumulative and synergistic



Reference

Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect effects)

Economic


√ √ √ P M D Will help support locally accessible employment opportunities


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will encourage inward investment, and development that is appropriate in scale, type and location

Social


√ √ √ P H D On-the-job training opportunities should be available with any new employment opportunities


√ √ √ T M D Supports the delivery of new local healthcare facilities in appropriate locations


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Supports the provision of appropriate new community facilities




√ √ √ T M D Supports the provision of appropriate new CLR activities. But these are likely to be limited to higher tier centres


√ √ √ P M D Will help to provide a framework for the provision of accessible essential services and support the vibrancy of local centres


− − − P M D

Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Should help support the local provision of essential services accessible by sustainable transport modes


√√ √√ √√ P M D Should help support local distinctiveness and improvements to the built environment




− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Locally accessible services should help to address transport related pollution


√ √ √ P M D Should support a reduction in transport related greenhouse gas emissions


?/- ?/- ?/- T M D Should help make efficient use of brownfield land. The impact on renewables and waste management will depend on individual developments and the management of individual centres.


This option would help support the economy of individual centres and ensure any new development is appropriate in scale and type to those centres. It should support improvements to the quality of the built environment in centres, along with the provision of locally accessible services. This will benefit transport, pollution and climate change. However, the delivery of any benefits will be somewhat dependent on the management of centres, initiatives and development proposals coming forward.

Option: RTC163 (Accepted) (New Policy LRC22)

(rtcee122) Snow Hill, Wakefield, Local Retail Centre




Reference

Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect effects)

Economic


√ √√ √√ P H L Would identify and quantify areas of opportunity for new development creating employment opportunities


√ √√ √√ P H L Would identify and quantify areas of opportunity for new development attracting new localised investment

Social


√ √ √ P M L Training opportunities may be available with any new employment created. District centres may also include new schools.


√ √ √ P M L This may ultimately depend on the type of uses delivered, but increased access to employment, health/leisure and community facilities and services all have the potential to improve health


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Increasing local community facilities has the potential to improve community vibrancy, participation, decision making and cohesion




√ √√ √√ P H L Provided such uses are included within the neighbourhood/district centres


√ √√ √√ P H L Provision of local essential services will reduce the need to travel. These should be of an appropriate scale in terms of any impact on the vitality and viability of existing town centres.


− √ √ P H L Provision of locally accessible facilities will support a high quality housing environment

Environmental


√ √ √ P H L The provision of district/neighbourhood centres should increase local access to key resources and services, by means other than the car, for areas where significant new housing development is expected. There may be some resultant improvements to public transport links


√ √ √ P M L Will promote development of communities with accessible services, employment, shops and leisure facilities within new allocations identified in the local plan for a significant scale of new development


? ? ? T M L This would be dependent on the specific location of any new district centre in relation to the environmental considerations of individual SPAs




? ? ? T M L This will depend on the specific nature of any development site, the details of any proposal and whether the proposed development is likely to become a destination in itself that may attract car journeys.


? ? ? T M L In theory such development should reduce the need to travel for local residents of the new housing development, but such development may become a destination in itself. Development would need to avoid flood zones as appropriate, and consider Suds and renewable energy etc.


? ? ? T M R This will depend on the specifics of the location of development and the details of any proposal


This option has the potential to promote the delivery of local facilities and services and local employment for residents of new developments, with the potential for new community and transport benefits. Environmental effects will be uncertain at this stage and will be largely location/proposal specific.

Option: RTC127

rtcee1 Provide support to existing businesses in the Green Belt.

SA Reference

SA Objectives Effects Commentary /Explanation (to include secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects & any assumptions)

Sho

rt T

erm

(0

-10

)

Me

diu

m T

erm

(1

0-2

0)

Lon

g T

erm

(A

fter

Pla

n)

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

Sca

le



Economic


√ √ √ P M D Will help support small scale local rural employment opportunities


√ √ √ P M D Will help support the growth of small scale local rural businesses

Social


√ √ √ P M D May provide increased local training opportunities


? ? ? T M D This will depend on the type of business


− − − P H D


√ √ √ P M D Has the potential to support the vibrancy of local communities


? ? ? T M D This will depend on the nature of the business and its relative accessibility


? ? ? T M D This will depend on the relative accessibility of individual businesses. If businesses are in isolated rural locations, they will not necessarily improve community access to essential facilities and services.




− − − P H D

Environmental


− − − P M D Unlikely to impact on public transport improvements.


? ? ? T H D This policy would relate to the continued use of existing sites. However, being in the Green Belt sites may be isolated, so may not improve accessibility and may impact on landscape character


× × × P M D Supporting the indiscriminate expansion/intensification of existing businesses in the Green Belt has the potential to be detrimental to the natural environment, especially in more sensitive areas.




? ? ? T M D This will depend on the nature of the business concerned and the particular issues relating to the site and surrounding area. The intensification/ expansion of existing businesses in the Green Belt may actually result in increased air pollution due to increased traffic, noise and light pollution.


× × × P M D The expansion/intensification of businesses in the Green Belt may increase the associated traffic, with resultant increase in greenhouse gas emissions and climate change implications


? ? ? T M D This policy may result in the reuse of brownfield land or could encourage expansion into greenfield land depending on the nature of the policy.


This policy has the potential to support local businesses, employment and training opportunities. However, depending on the proximity of individual businesses to rural communities, it may increase the need to travel with knock on effects for pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. Similarly it may not necessarily improve access to facilities and services for local people, and may have detrimental impacts on the natural environment. Any policy would need to take account of these issues. This policy may be unnecessary as the many of the considerations for developing rural businesses will already be covered in existing LDF policies and NPPF

Option: RTC128

rtcee97 Support existing retail in the Green Belt

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic




√ √ √ P M L Supporting businesses will support employment


√ √ √ P H L Supporting businesses will promote investment and economic success

Social


√ √ √ P M L Training opportunities may be available with employment opportunities


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


? ? ? T M L May help to support tourism in rural areas


? ? ? T H L May increase provision of local facilities and services in rural areas


− − − P M L

Environmental




× × × P H L Likely to encourage increased car use to establishments in more isolated rural areas


× × × P H L May encourage development of greenfield land outside the existing settlement hierarchy and encourage car use


× × × P H L Development of greenfield land in the open countryside may have a detrimental impact on biodiversity


? ? ? T M L Unlikely to reduce local levels of pollution and may even contribute to more local pollution associated with increased car journeys


× × × P H L Likely to increase car journeys with associated greenhouse gas emissions and climate change implications




× × × P M L Unlikely to promote the efficient use of brownfield sites or promote waste minimisation or renewable energy resources


This proposal may promote rural employment, economic prosperity and tourism. However, it is likely to result in additional car journeys to access sites with poor public transport links. This has implications for associated greenhouse gas emissions / increased air and noise pollution. Furthermore, expansion of rural sites has the potential for detrimental impact on rural landscapes, greenfield sites, Green Belt and biodiversity. Such a policy may also be unnecessary as existing LDF and NPPF policies support the rural economy.

Option: RTC129

RTCEE78: Additional short stay parking on main roads in Pontefract Town Centre to encourage shoppers

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M L Supporting local businesses may increase local employment opportunities




√√ √√ √√ P M L Encouraging parking in the town centre may help to encourage shopping in the town centre rather than out of town, with associated economic success

Social


√ √ √ P M L Increased local business success may have a knock on effect of improving training opportunities associated with local employment.


× × × P M L Encouraging car use into town centres may result in a reduction in air quality and increased noise pollution, with associated knock on effects for health


× × × P M L Increased road traffic may reduce road safety


− − − P M L


− − − T M L


− − − T M L


− − − P M L

Environmental




× × × P H D Would not result in any public transport improvements or encourage the use of alternative modes of transport to the private car


− − − P M D


× × × P M D Air and noise pollution associated with increased car use may have detrimental knock on effects for biodiversity.


× × × P M D Encouraging an increase in private car use would not help to address associated air and noise pollution


× × × P M D Would not help to address greenhouse gas emissions and climate change implications associated with private car use


− − − P M D




This option would support local businesses by increasing people in the town centre, which would support associated employment and training opportunities. The option may improve access to facilities and services, but not by means of public transport. Associated traffic may impact on road safety, air and noise pollution, public health, biodiversity and climate change.

Option: RTC130

rtcee78 Unrestricted short stay parking on main road routes into town centres to promote passing trade

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M D Supporting local businesses may increase local employment opportunities


√√ √√ √√ P M D Increasing the likelihood of passing trade from motorists will support business success

Social


√ √ √ P M D Increased local business success may have a knock on effect of improving training opportunities associated with local employment.




× × × P M D Encouraging car use into town centres may result in a reduction in air quality and increased noise pollution, with associated knock on effects for health


× × × P M D Increased road traffic may reduce road safety


√ √ √ P M D May improve access to facilities and services in areas less well served by public transport


? ? ? T M D This would depend on the spatial relationship between the roadside car parking and the CLR facilities


? ? ? T M D This may encourage people to travel by car to access facilities rather than use local facilities


− − − P M D

Environmental


× × × P H D Would not result in any public transport improvements or encourage the use of alternative modes of transport to the private car




− − − P M D


× × × P M D Air and noise pollution associated with increased car use may have detrimental knock on effects for biodiversity.




× × × P M D Would not help to address greenhouse gas emissions and climate change implications associated with private car use


− − − P M D


This option would support local businesses by increasing the likelihood of passing trade, which would support associated employment and training opportunities. The option may improve access to facilities and services, but not by means of public transport. Associated traffic may impact on road safety. Associated air and noise pollution may impact on public health, biodiversity and climate change.

Option: RTC131

rtcee113 Provide parking to generate trade (District)



SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M D Improved business success would support local employment opportunities


√√ √√ √√ P H D Providing appropriate parking would support the success of local businesses

Social


√ √ √ P M D On the job training is likely to be associated with local employment opportunities


? ? ? T M D Any associated increase in town centre traffic may result in a reduction in air quality and increased noise pollution with associated knock on effects for health


? ? ? T M D Increased traffic may result in reduced road safety




√ √ √ P M D Provision of parking to support local business success will improve the condition of town centres and contribute towards community vibrancy


√ √ √ P M D Appropriate town centre parking provision will provide access to centrally located CLR activities and facilities


− − − P M D Will support the vibrancy of town centres, but will not necessarily ensure that essential facilities and services are available by means other than the private car


− − − P M D

Environmental


× × × P M D The proposal would not result in any improvements to alternative modes of transport to the private car


? ? ? T M D Improvements to the quality, design and location of car parking in town centres could improve the quality of the built environment




× × × P M D Air and noise pollution associated with potential increased car use may have detrimental knock on effects for biodiversity.




× × × P M D Encouraging an increase in private car use would not help to address associated greenhouse gas emissions and climate change implications


− − − P M D


This option has the potential to support local business success; local employment and training opportunities; town centre vitality; and the quality of the built environment. However, if the option results in an increase in town centre traffic this could impact on road safety. In addition, increased air and noise pollution could have knock on effects for public health, biodiversity, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. The option would not promote the use of public transport.

Option: RTC132 (New Policy LRC20)

(rtcee124) City Fields (Canal Side) Local Retail Centres

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect



Economic


√ √√ √√ P H L Appropriate retail/town centre uses within the district centres will provide localised employment opportunities


√ √√ √√ P H L Appropriate retail/town centre uses within the district centres will increase opportunities for inward investment.

Social


√ √ √ P M L It is likely that new employment opportunities will include the provision for appropriate on-the-job training opportunities. New schools may be included in district centres


√ √ √ P M L This may ultimately depend on the type of uses delivered, but increased access to employment, health/leisure and community facilities and services all have the potential to improve health


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Increasing local community facilities has the potential to improve community vibrancy, participation, decision making and cohesion


√ √√ √√ P H L These are likely to form part of any district centre.




√ √√ √√ P H L Provision of local essential services will reduce the need to travel by the private car. Any provision should be of an appropriate scale in terms of the potential impact on the vitality and viability of existing town centres.


− √ √ P H L Provision of locally accessible retail facilities will support a high quality housing environment

Environmental


√ √ √ P H L The provision of district centres should increase local access to key resources and services my means other than the car. There may be some resultant improvements to public transport links


√ √ √ P M L Will promote development of communities with accessible services, employment, shops and leisure facilities within the allocated Special Policy Area (SPA) identified for a significant scale of new development


? ? ? T M L The SPA contains a significant amount of greenfield land with some nature conservation considerations. The location of any district centre will have to take account of this




? ? ? T M L The SPA is adjacent to Wakefield City AQMA. Increased development adjacent to this may impact on the extent of the AQMA depending on whether the proposed development becomes a destination, particularly considering the introduction of the Wakefield eastern relief road


? ? ? T M L In theory such development should reduce the need to travel for local residents of the new housing development, but such development may become a destination in itself. Development would need to avoid flood zones as appropriate, and consider suds and renewable energy etc.


? ? ? T M R This will depend on the specifics of the location of development and the details of any proposal


This policy option has the potential to provide local employment, facilities and services for residents of the new houses within the SPA, with community and sustainable transport benefits. However, environmental effects are more uncertain at this time and would be dependent on the specific location/details of any proposal.

Option: RTC133

rtcee23: Improve pedestrian links to the Hepworth gallery

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic




− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Improving pedestrian links between the Hepworth and the City Centre/surrounding businesses will encourage linked trips, thereby supporting the local economy

Social


− − − P M L


?/- ?/- ?/- P M L Encouraging residents/visitors to access the gallery by walking may have some minor additional health benefits


√ √ √ P M L Improving pedestrian linkages may provide opportunities for reducing crime/the fear of crime along pedestrian routes through design measures


?/- ?/- ?/- P M L May encourage an increase in community participation in activities at the gallery


√ √ √ P M L Will improve the accessibility of the Hepworth as a CLR facility for the district's residents and visitors/tourists




√ √ √ P M L Should help support the vibrancy of the city centre


− − − P M L

Environmental


√ √ √ P M L Support the use of sustainable modes of transport


√ √ √ P M L Supports improvements to the quality of the built environment, promotes accessibility and reduces the need to travel by the private car


− − − P M L




√ √ √ P M L Supports a reduction in transport related air and noise pollution in the Wakefield City AQMA(3)


√ √ √ P M L Supports a reduction in transport related greenhouse gas emissions in the interests of addressing climate change.


− − − P M L


This option supports the local economy by improving the accessibility of the Hepworth as an international CLR destination and improving links with the city centre and other nearby businesses. The option supports tourism, participation and community vibrancy. The option supports improvements to the quality of the built environment and provided opportunities for designing out crime. The option also supports sustainable transport with associated benefits for air quality, climate change and health.

Option: RTC134

rtcee25 Provide more green space

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic

SA1 Good quality employment opportunities

− − − P H D



available to all


√ √ √ P H D Additional greenspace will improve the quality of a local environment, which may improve its attractiveness as a location for businesses in which to establish themselves.

Social


− − − P H D


√ √√ √√ P H D Improved availability of accessible green space within the district will provide more localised opportunities for recreational activities with the associated health benefits.


− − − P H D


√√ √√ √√ P M D The provision of additional green space will provide local community facilities that will increase the opportunity for participation in community activities.


√√ √√ √√ P H R The provision of additional accessible open space has the potential to improve facilities for local people, tourists and visitors and enhance culture and heritage.


− − − P M D


− − − P M D

Environmental




√ √ √ P M R Providing local green space will reduce the need for residents to travel to take advantage of leisure/recreational facilities


− − − P M D


√ √√ √√ P H D Provision of additional green space has the potential to be used for leisure/recreation and to provide biodiversity benefits


√ √ √ P M D Additional greenspace could be provided on previously contaminated sites, which could serve to clean up contaminated land


√ √ √ P H D Additional greenspace can help to manage the effects of climate change through CO2 absorption, urban cooling, Suds and flood reduction




√ √ √ P H D Provision of additional greenspace has the potential to protect natural resources and promote the efficient use of land.


The provision of additional greenspace would improve the accessibility of local facilities for leisure/recreation. This would bring associated health benefits and may improve the attractiveness of the local area for business and tourism. Improved opportunities for community participation may also result. Greenspace may also enhance biodiversity, address contaminated land and pollution, and manage the effects of climate change.

Option: RTC135

rtcee128 Allocate convenience floor space early in plan period

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


? √ √√ P M D The provision of additional convenience floor space early in the plan to support housing growth would improve accessible employment opportunities in the long term, but this would need to be balanced against any impact on existing retailers in terms of capacity and the net increase in jobs.


? √ √√ P M D The policy would encourage inward investment and increase retail floor space. Any policy/strategy would need to consider scale and location. The impact of early provision on existing retailers in terms of capacity would need to be considered to understand the net impact.



Social


√ √ √ P M D Opportunities for on the job training are usually available with this type of employment.


− − − P M D


− − − P M D


? √ √ P M D Economic regeneration will improve community vitality and social cohesion


− − − P M D


√ √√ √√ P H D Has the potential to increase the provision of more localised convenience shopping opportunities. However, this would need to be balanced against any potential impact on the vitality of town centre retailing and capacity considerations


? √√ √√ P H D In the medium to long term will result in locally accessible retail facilities to support housing growth

Environmental

SA10 To provide a transport network which maximises access whilst minimising

− − − P M D



detrimental impacts


√ √ √ P M D Provided development is in appropriate locations, it will increase the accessibility of local communities to shopping opportunities whilst protecting and enhancing the built environment


− − − P M D


? ? ? P M D This will be dependent on how accessible new retail opportunities are and what mode of transport is used to access them.


? ? ? P M D This will depend on how sites are accessed, additional associated vehicle movements including goods deliveries, and any onsite renewable energy generation


? ? ? P M D This will depend on energy usage and any renewable generation, waste management and location of development in relation to current land uses and the settlement hierarchy.




This option has the potential to improve the local economy, improve local employment and training opportunities; improve access to local retail facilities; and improve community vibrancy. However, care would need to be taken in terms of local retail capacity and any impact on existing businesses and the vitality of town centres. Any environmental impacts would need to take account of the location of development and the likely mode of transport to sites, with any resultant impacts on air pollution, in addition to energy usage and waste management.

Option: RTC136

rtcee18 No reduction in parking provision in Wakefield

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


− − − P H L


√ √ √ P H D Continuing to provide an element of short stay car parking for visitors to the city centre will continue to support the local economy

Social


− − − P M L




? ? ? T M L City centre parking close to health facilities will support the access to services, but may remove incentives to use alternative modes of transport such as walking and cycling and would not reduce levels of traffic in town centres with associated air quality issues


− − − P M L No reduction in town centre traffic will not change road safety


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P H D Maintaining a certain element of short stay city centre parking will help to support access to CLR activities and venues


√ √ √ P H D Maintaining an appropriate element of city centre parking will help to support the vibrancy of the city centre, but will not promote the use of public transport


− − − T M L

Environmental


× × × P H D Would not stimulate greater public transport use




− − − P M L


× × × P M D Continuing levels of air and noise pollution associated with car use may be detrimental for biodiversity


× × × P H D Would not help to address air and noise pollution resulting from private car use


× × × P H D Would not help to address greenhouse gas emissions associated with private car use


− − − P M L

Option Conclusion & Mitigation

Car parking in Wakefield city centre has recently been addressed as part of the CWAAP. Short stay car parking has been retained inside the Emerald Ring, with long stay car parking located further out. Car parking in new developments is controlled by LDF Development policies in line with the principles of sustainable transport. This is designed to reduce commuter traffic, whilst providing sufficient city centre parking for shoppers. Maintaining an appropriate element of short stay car parking will, therefore, support the local economy; maintain access to facilities and services; and support community vibrancy. However, there may be resultant air quality, biodiversity and greenhouse gas/climate change implications associated with this. Any policy would need to be compatible with existing policies on car parking in the



adopted LDF documents.

Option: RTC137

GVA Retail Study: New Foodstore - upscaling of existing (provision for a full range mainstream foodstore - Asda, Morrison's Sainsbury's and Tesco, in an edge of centre location)

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


?/- ?/- ?/- T M L This would not necessarily generate significant additional employment, as the identified capacity in the Retail Study would not be sufficient to support a full range mainstream foodstore, as it would not be of a sufficient scale to prevent outflow, and secure inflow of trade. The trading impact is likely to be on existing provision in the town.


?/- ?/- ?/- T M L For reasons stated above, it is questionable if this would actually encourage inward investment, due to potential competition from existing and committed schemes, within the vicinity, reducing the commercial interest in such a proposal. The location and scale would also have to be appropriate to support the existing town centre, rather than compete with it.

Social




?/- ?/- ?/- T M L As above, training opportunities would be linked to the actual provision of an increased number of jobs, which may not come to fruition, given the retail capacity and the potential impact on existing trade in the town.


?/√ ?/√

?/√

T M L The provision of a full range mainstream foodstore would increase the availability of locally accessible fresh food, with knock on implications for health.


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Would improve the availability of shopping facilities for the local catchment of the town, in an edge of centre location, with strong links to the town centre, accessible by public transport


− − − P M L

Environmental


√ √ √ P M L Would result in an increase range of shopping provision within the locality, reducing the need to travel to other surrounding settlements to access a full range mainstream foodstore.




√ √ √ P M L Provides the opportunity to contribute to the regeneration of Normanton, possibly as part of the special policy area allocation (SPA8). This would represent the reuse of brownfield land, in the urban area, which could contribute to improvements to the quality of the local built environment.


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M D Centrally located retailing would help address transport related air and noise pollution with knock on health benefits close to the M62 AQMA(4).


√ √ √ P M D An increased range in accessible town centre retailing would support a reduction in transport related greenhouse gas emissions in the interests of climate change


− − − P M D




The TC is currently relatively viable with low vacancy rates serving a discrete catchment, with 2 small edge- of-centre supermarkets. A full range edge of centre supermarket may help to retain some of the current leakage to larger supermarkets in other nearby towns. This would be positive in terms of meeting local needs locally, thereby reducing the need to travel with positive impacts for reducing transport related air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. This would be positive for health and climate change. The socio-economic impacts of the proposal are less clear. Provided the site was well linked to the town centre it could help support the town centre by attracting trade, and providing local employment and training opportunities. However, given the anticipated scale of such a store, it is likely that the trading impact would fall primarily on existing stores in the town rather than drawing trade from other stores outside the town.

Option: RTC138

rtcee111: Cycle routes in and around Featherstone town

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L May help support local tourism in the Nine Lakes area.



Social


− − − P M L


√√ √√ √√ P M L Improved cycle routes will increase opportunities for cycling with knock on benefits for health


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


√√ √√ √√ P M L Will increase opportunities for participation in CLR activities, providing links with greenspace and the Nine Lakes area


− − − P M L


− − − P M L

Environmental


√ √ √ P M L Will increase opportunities to travel my non-car means




− − − P M L


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Improving opportunities for cycling will help address transport related air pollution


√ √ √ P M L Improving opportunities for cycling will help address transport related greenhouse gas pollution in the interest of climate change


− − − P M L


May help support tourism in the interests of the local economy. Will improve opportunities for cycling as a leisure and transport pursuit with benefits for health, sustainable transport and climate change.

Option: RTC139

rtcee113 Provide parking to generate trade (Featherstone)



SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M D Improved business success would support local employment opportunities


√√ √√ √√ P H D Providing appropriate parking would support the success of local businesses

Social


√ √ √ P M D On the job training is likely to be associated with local employment opportunities


? ? ? T M D Any associated increase in town centre traffic may result in a reduction in air quality and increased noise pollution with associated knock on effects for health


? ? ? T M D Increased traffic may result in reduced road safety




√ √ √ P M D Provision of parking to support local business success will improve the condition of town centres and contribute towards community vibrancy


√ √ √ P M D Appropriate town centre parking provision will provide access to centrally located CLR activities and facilities


− − − P M D Will support the vibrancy of town centres, but will not necessarily ensure that essential facilities and services are available by means other than the private car


− − − P M D

Environmental


× × × P M D The proposal would not result in any improvements to alternative modes of transport to the private car


? ? ? T M D Improvements to the quality, design and location of car parking in town centres could improve the quality of the built environment




× × × P M D Air and noise pollution associated with potential increased car use may have detrimental knock on effects for biodiversity.




× × × P M D Encouraging an increase in private car use would not help to address associated greenhouse gas emissions and climate change implications


− − − P M D


This option has the potential to support local business success; local employment and training opportunities; town centre vitality; and the quality of the built environment. However, if the option results in an increase in town centre traffic this could impact on road safety. In addition, increased air and noise pollution could have knock on effects for public health, biodiversity, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. The option would not promote the use of public transport.

Option: RTC140 (New Policy EPR4)

rtcee66: Horsefair to Micklegate (Accepted)

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect



Economic


− − − P M L The option is in an area of income and employment deprivation but is unlikely to directly create new employment opportunities.


√ √ √ P M L Creates links between possible development sites, the retail policy area and primary shopping frontage. Will support visitor tourism which supports local businesses and employment

Social


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L The option is in an area of health deprivation, and will promote opportunities for walking with health benefits


√ √ √ P M L Improving pedestrian links should increase footfall which will support natural surveillance


√ √ √ P M L Supports community vibrancy and public participation in CLR activities


√ √ √ P M L Will improve accessibility of CLR activities


− − − P M L




− − − P M L

Environmental


√ √ √ P M L Improving pedestrian links will encourage walking rather than private car use


√ √ √ P M L Improving pedestrian links will support improvements to the built environment in this historic part of the town. Links with Listed Buildings, Buildings of Local Interest, Archaeological Sites and the Conservation Area. This presents opportunities to enhance the historic environment, but must ensure that it is conserved appropriately.


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Encouraging walking will support a reduction in traffic in the town centre, with an associated reduction in transported related air and noise pollution, with knock on benefits for public health


√ √ √ P M L Will support a reduction in transport related greenhouse gas emissions




− − − P M L


This option will support visitor tourism with benefits for the local economy. Increasing access to CLR activities will support community vibrancy. Encouraging walking will support improvements in health and reduce transport related air pollution. This will have benefits for both public health and climate change.

Option: RTC141

rtcee95: Categorise South Elmsall as a main town

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M L May support business development and employment opportunities


√ √ √ P M L May attract inward investment

Social




√ √ √ P M L Training may be provided with new employment opportunities


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


? ? ? T M L This would be dependent on any associated knock on effects resulting from investment, training and employment


? ? ? T M L Would not necessarily result in any quantitative increase in provision, but may result in qualitative improvements to existing facilities


√ √ √ P M L May help to support the vibrancy of the town centre


− − − P M L

Environmental


− − − T M L Unlikely to have a direct impact on the provision of public transport




√ √ √ P M L May help support local distinctiveness


− − − P M L


? ? ? T M L This will depend on whether there are significant changes in the number of people visiting the centre and their associated modes of transport


? ? ? T M L This will depend on whether there are significant changes in the number of people visiting the centre and their associated modes of transport


− − − T M L


This option may help support community vibrancy, inward investment, job creation/skills training by making the town more prominent in the hierarchy. Environmental effects are more uncertain and would depend on whether there was a significant increase in visitor numbers or new development within the town. However, this is considered unlikely in relation to the retail study carried out at early engagement stage.



Option: RTC142

rtcee89: Small scale office space

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M L Local office space will provide opportunities for local employment


√√ √√ √√ P H L Local office space will provide opportunities for local investment, and economic growth

Social


√ √ √ P M L Local employment and business development may provide opportunities for on-the-job training


− − − P H L


− − − P H L




− − − P H L


− − − P H L


√ √ √ P H L Local employment and services will support community vibrancy


− − − P H L

Environmental


− − − P H L


√ √ √ P M L This will be site/proposal specific but local office space in existing centres should reduce the need to travel, protect the historic environment and promote efficient land use patterns

SA12 A bio-diverse and attractive natural

− − − P H L



environment


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Local office provision should reduce the need to travel to access employment and services, reducing greenhouse gas emissions. The specifics of any development could address more specific climate change issues.


− − − P M L Provision of office space in existing centres should result in efficient land use patterns.


Local office space of an appropriate scale in smaller centres should contribute to local employment, training and economic prosperity and reduce the need to travel. This is positive in terms of reducing greenhouse gas emissions and has the potential to promote efficient land use patterns whilst protecting environmentally sensitive areas.

Option: RTC143

Cycle routes to town centre, railway station/transport links (South Elmsall)

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic

SA1 Good quality employment

− − − P H L



opportunities available to all


− − − P H L

Social


− − − P H L


√ √ √ P M L Cycle routes will support and encourage cycling as a form of transport with associated health benefits


− − − P H L


√ √ √ P M L May help improve community participation in cycling activities and thereby community confidence and vibrancy


√ √ √ P M L Will enhance cycling facilities for both sustainable transport and recreation


− − − P H L


− − − P H L

Environmental




√√ √√ √√ P H L Will promote sustainable modes of transport


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Reducing transport related noise and air pollution would have knock on benefits for effects for local biodiversity


√√ √√ √√ P M L Will help address transport related noise and air pollution


√√ √√ √√ P M L Will help address transport related GHG emissions in the interests of addressing climate change


√√ √√ √√ P M L Will help reduce the use of non-renewable oil based transport fuels.




This option would have positive benefits in the locality for health and wellbeing, community participation and vibrancy. The option would also have benefits for sustainable transport, pollution, climate change and sustainable resource use.

Option: RTC144

rtcee92: Develop South Elmsall as a major public transport link for the South East of the district

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g Te

rm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P H D May increase access to employment opportunities by public transport


√ √ √ P H L Should encourage local investment in infrastructure

Social


− − − P M L

SA4 Conditions and services to engender

√ √ √ P M L Should make services more accessible by public transport for local people.



good health


− − − P H L


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Will increase ability of local residents to access CLR facilities


√ √ √ P M L Will increase ability of local residents to access essential services


− − − P M L

Environmental


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will improve availability of public transport and reduce the need to travel by private car

SA11 A quality built environment that protects and enhances its historic assets, and efficient land use patterns that make good use of derelict sites,

− − − P M L



minimise travel and promote balanced development


? ? ? T M D Has the potential to impact on the natural environment depending on any associated infrastructure/construction


? ? ? T M L May lead to local improvements in air quality as a result of reduced use of the private car.


√ √ √ P M D Improvements to public transport facilities should help reduce use of the private car, thereby, reducing greenhouse gas emissions


− − − P M L


This proposal has the potential to support the local economy and employment in the South East by improving public transport links and accessibility. This will have knock on effects for local community vibrancy, and may help to address greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the use of the private car for journeys within the South East and to wider parts of the district.

Option: RTC145

Provide a New Swimming Pool in South Elmsall




Reference

Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect effects)

Economic


√ √ √ P M L Would provide some new local employment opportunities


√ √ √ P M L May make the town a more attractive area for private investment.

Social


√ √ √ P M L New employment opportunities are likely to be accompanied by some on the job training.


√√ √√ √√ P H L The availability of a locally accessible swimming pool would have significant health benefits for local residents, and increase the incidence of local participation in activities at the pool.


− − − P M L


√√ √√ √√ P M L Such a facility is likely to increase community participation, social cohesion and community confidence.




√√ √√ √√ P H L Will increase local accessibility to facilities for leisure and recreation in an area of health deprivation


√√ √√ √√ P H L Will increase locally accessible facilities.


− − − P M L

Environmental


− − − P M L


?/√ ?/√

?/√

T M L This would be dependent on the specific location on the development. However, the scheme would have the potential to deliver significant benefits for urban regeneration within the built environment.


− − − P M L




?/√ ?/√

?/√

T M L This would depend on the specific location and nature of the development, but could be designed to a high standard of sustainability, on an accessible, brownfield site. Thereby making a positive contribution to this objective.


?/√ ?/√

?/√

T M L This would depend on the specific location and nature of the development, but could be designed to a high standard of sustainability, on an accessible, brownfield site. Thereby making a positive contribution to this objective.


?/√ ?/√

√ T M L This would depend on the specific location and nature of the development, but could be designed to a high standard of sustainability, on an accessible, brownfield site. Thereby making a positive contribution to this objective.


Providing a centrally accessible swimming pool has the potential to provide local employment and training in an area of income and employment deprivation. This is an area of health deprivation; therefore, a new facility would have positive benefits for local health, wellbeing and community vibrancy. Provided that the scheme is delivered to a high standard of sustainable design, preferably on a brownfield site, in a centrally accessible location, this option has the potential to make a positive contribution to pollution, climate change and efficient resource use.

Option: RTC146

Saved UDP Policy CAS59: Castleford Town Centre Inset Map, Retail Development on the Edge of the Shopping Centre (Policy S2 shall apply)

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic




√ √ √ P H D Will ensure that any new employment opportunities created are accessible by public transport


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will support inward investment and provide opportunities for an increase in retail floor space

Social


√ √ √ P H D Any new employment should provide on-the-job training opportunities


− − − P M D


− − − P M D




− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Will provide locally accessible shopping by means other than the private car


− − − P H D

Environmental




√√ √√ √√ P M D Should ensure that shopping can be accessed by means other than the private car


√ √ √ P M D Should minimise the need to travel, make efficient use of land and provide opportunities to deliver a quality built environment.


− − − P M D


√ √ √ P M D Reducing the need to travel will reduce transport related air pollution


√ √ √ P M D Reducing the need to travel will reduce transport related greenhouse gas emissions

SA15 Prudent and efficient use of energy and natural resources, with minimal

? ? ? T M D This may be dependent on the details of specific proposals



production of waste


Whilst further significant edge of centre retail development is not anticipated within the plan period, this option will ensure that edge of centre retail development is of an appropriate scale and well connected to Castleford town centre. This will help to reduce the need to travel by non-car means and help support the vitality and viability of the existing retail centre. In addition, the policy will reduce transport related air pollution/greenhouse gas emissions, and protect local environmental amenity by managing local traffic movements.

Option: RTC147

Saved UDP Policy CAS60: Increased office provision in Castleford Town Centre (relates to both A2 and B1a)

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√√ √√ √√ P M L Will support the delivery of centrally accessible local employment


√√ √√ √√ P M L Office is a main town centre use which contributes to the vitality and viability of town centres. A2 uses currently encompass 12% of existing floor space. Castleford has recorded notable take up of B1a office floor space in the period 1996-2012 and it is expected that there will be a continuing demand for office space as the economy grows.



Social


√√ √√ √√ P M L On-the-job training opportunities are expected with new employment.


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Will support the provision of centrally located accessible facilities and services


− − − P M L

Environmental


√ √ √ P M L Will support a reduction in the need to travel by encouraging employment, facilities and services in central locations accessible by public transport




√ √ √ P M L Encouraging office as an appropriate town centre use will help maintain occupancy rates, which in turn will help support the quality of the built environment.


− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Will encourage centrally accessible local employment, facilities and services, reducing transport related air and noise pollution. This may have knock on health benefits in the Castleford AQMA


√ √ √ P M L Reducing the need to travel will reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the interests of addressing climate change


− − − P M L Unlikely to directly impact on energy consumption or waste management within the town centre


This option would be positive for the local economy. It will support the provision of locally accessible employment, facilities and services. This will benefit community vibrancy, and help reduce the need to travel. In turn this will help in addressing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions for the benefit of health and climate change. However, the policy may not be strictly necessary in view of existing LDF and NPPF policies.



Option: RTC148

GVA Retail Study Impact Assessment

SA Reference


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P H D Will help direct new retail employment opportunities to centrally, accessible locations.


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will provide a flexible approach for the considering the impact of out-of-centre retail development without undermining the vitality and viability of existing retail centres

Social


√ √ √ T M D Any new employment opportunities are likely to provide on-the-job-training opportunities


− − − P M D


− − − P M D




√ √ √ P M D Should direct convenience and comparison retail to centrally accessible location to support town centre and community vibrancy.


√ √ √ P M D Will increase the opportunities for retailing as a leisure activity in centrally accessible locations.


√ √ √ P M D Should ensure that retail is delivered in accessible locations.


− − − P M D

Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Should help direct retail development to locations where it can be accessed by non-car means



SA12 A bio-diverse and attractive natural

− − − P M D



environment








In NPPF paragraph 26 the impact assessment also applies to applications for leisure and office development, it may be prudent to consider whether a locally set floorspace threshold is relevant in for these uses. Policy CS2 also refers to other town centre related uses. Whilst this option relates to the impact of out-of-centre retail proposals it does not specify what impact is to be assessed and on what, i.e. the vitality, and viability of existing centres, and any other anticipated investment. Therefore it may be relevant to consider revising the text or specifying a link to the policy in NPPF. Theoretically this policy should help direct larger retail schemes to central locations accessible by non-car means, which would help to manage transport related pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. The need to consider accessibility and sustainable transport is already set out in other Local Plan policies. However, it may be relevant to consider whether it is appropriate to specifically refer to transport and accessibility in this policy.

Option: RTC149

WMDC Impact Assessment




Reference

Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect effects)

Economic




√√ √√ √√ P H D Will provide a flexible approach for the considering the impact of out-of-centre retail development without undermining the vitality and viability of existing retail centres

Social


√ √ √ T M D Any new employment opportunities are likely to provide on-the-job-training opportunities


− − − P M D


− − − P M D








√ √ √ P M D Should ensure that retail is delivered in accessible locations.


− − − P M D

Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Should help direct retail development to locations where it can be accessed by non-car means




− − − P M D










In NPPF paragraph 26 the impact assessment also applies to applications for leisure and office development, it may be prudent to consider whether a locally set floorspace threshold is relevant in for these uses. Policy CS2 also refers to other town centre related uses. Whilst this option relates to the impact of out-of-centre retail proposals it does not specify what impact is to be assessed and on what, i.e. the vitality, and viability of existing centres, and any other anticipated investment. Therefore it may be relevant to consider revising the text or specifying a link to the policy in NPPF. This policy should help direct larger retail schemes to central locations accessible by non-car means, which would help to manage transport related pollution and greenhouse gas emissions.

Final Sustainability Appraisal Policy Options


(Previously RTC 149) (RTCCD93): Impact Threshold - Accepted

SA Reference SA Objectives Effects Commentary /Explanation (to include secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects & any assumptions)

Sho

rt T

erm

(0

-10

)

Me

diu

m T

erm

(1

0-2

0)

Lon

g Te

rm (

Aft

er

Pla

n)

Pe

rman

en

ce

Like

liho

od

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

Sca

le

Economic

SA1 Good quality employment




opportunities available to all


√√ √√ √√ P H D Will provide a flexible approach for the considering the impact of out-of-centre retail development without undermining the vitality and viability of existing retail centres.

Social


√ √ √ T M D Any new employment opportunities are likely to provide on-the-job-training opportunities.


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D





SA8 Local needs met locally √ √ √ P M D Should ensure that retail is delivered in accessible locations.


_ _ _ P M D

Environmental


√ √ √ P M D Should help direct retail development to locations where it can be accessed by non-car means.






_ _ _ P M D

SA13 Minimal pollution levels √ √ √ P M D Should help minimise transport related air pollution by reducing the need to travel by private car.


√ √ √ P M D Should help to minimise transport related greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the need to travel by private car.


? ? ? T M D This will be dependent on the details of individual retail proposals.


This option increases the threshold above which an impact assessment will be required, but remains below the threshold set in the NPPF. The policy has also been amended in line with the recommendations of the Initial SA report. Whilst the thresholds are higher than those in the earlier option, the policy should continue to help direct larger retail schemes to central locations, accessible by non-car means. This would help to promote town centre vitality and viability with associated economic, social and environmental benefits. These include locally accessible employment opportunities and a reduced need to travel by private car.



Option: RTC165 (Accepted) (New Policy DC3)

(RTCCD47) City Fields District Centre

SA Reference SA Objectives Effects Commentary /Explanation (to include secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects)

Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g Te

rm

Pe

rman

en

ce

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P H L Appropriate retail/town centre uses within the district centre will provide localised employment opportunities. However, consideration should be given to the cumulative impact of retail development within the Special Policy Area on existing centres in any detailed proposal.


√ √ √ P H L Appropriate retail/town centre uses within the district centre will increase opportunities for inward investment. However, consideration should be given to the cumulative impact of retail development within the Special Policy Area on existing centres in any detailed proposal.

Social


√ √ √ P M L It is likely that new employment opportunities will include the provision for appropriate on-the-job training opportunities. New schools may be included in district centres.


√ √ √ P M L This may ultimately depend on the type of uses delivered, but increased access to employment, health/leisure and community facilities and services all have the potential to improve health.


_ _ _ P M L


√ √ √ P M L Increasing local community facilities has the potential to improve community vibrancy, participation, decision making and cohesion. However, consideration should be given to the impact on existing centres in any detailed proposal.




√ √ √ P M L Some such facilities may form part of a new district centre.


√ √√ √√ P H L Provision of local essential services will reduce the need to travel by the private car. Any provision should be of an appropriate scale in terms of the potential impact on the vitality and viability of other existing town centres.


_ √ √ P H L The provision of district centres should increase local access to key resources and services by means other than the private car. There may be some resultant improvements to public transport links.

Environmental


√ √ √ P H L The provision of district centres should increase local access to key resources and services by means other than the private car. There may be some resultant improvements to public transport links.


√ √ √ P M L Will promote development of communities with accessible services, employment, shops and leisure facilities within the allocated Special Policy Area (SPA) identified for a significant scale of new development.


? ? ? T M L The indicative location of the District Centre is on greenfield land, and there are some nature conservation considerations within the wider Special Policy Area. Therefore, the final details of the district centre will need to take account of such considerations. This should be made clear in the local plan allocation. But existing local plan policies provide a robust framework for addressing such issues should they arise.


? ? ? T M L The SPA is adjacent to Wakefield City AQMA. Increased development adjacent to this may impact on the extent of the AQMA depending on whether the proposed development becomes a destination, particularly considering the introduction of the Wakefield Eastern Relief Road. However, the impacts of the relief road have already been considered through its allocation and subsequent planning consent.




? ? ? T M L In theory this development should reduce the need to travel for residents of the new housing development. However, it is also likely to attract existing surrounding residents who may arrive by private car. Therefore, this would need to be addressed through any future planning application. Development would need to avoid flood zones as appropriate, and consider Suds and renewable energy etc. Again it is recommended that this is highlighted as part of the allocation, but existing local plan policies provide a robust framework for addressing such issues should they arise.


? ? ? T M L This will depend on the specifics of the location of the development and the details of any proposal.


The site is close to Wakefield City centre and once allocated would not be subject to the impact assessment. In addition, there is currently no defined site area or boundary for this allocation. Therefore, care would need to be taken that the scale of any development would not have an unacceptable impact on other existing surrounding centres, especially given that 2 Local Retail Centres (RTC132 and RTC166) are now also proposed within the Special Policy Area allocation. However, given the scale of new residential development proposed within the Special Policy Area, it may be possible to justify the need for a new District Centre along with 2 Local Retail Centres within the allocation in order to make the new communities more sustainable. This would provide local employment, facilities and services for residents of the new houses within the SPA, with community and sustainable transport benefits. However, environmental effects are more uncertain at this time and would be dependent on the specific location/details of any proposal.



Option: RTC166 (Accepted) (New Policy LRC21)

(RTCCD47) City Fields (Doncaster Road Gateway) Wakefield


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g Te

rm

Pe

rman

en

ce

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P H L Appropriate retail/town centre uses within the local centre will provide localised employment opportunities. However, consideration should be given to the cumulative the impact of retail development within the Special Policy Area on existing centres in any detailed proposal.


√ √ √ P H L Appropriate retail/town centre uses within the district centre will increase opportunities for inward investment. However, consideration should be given to the cumulative the impact of retail development within the Special Policy Area on existing centres in any detailed proposal.

Social


√ √ √ P M L It is likely that new employment opportunities will include the provision for appropriate on-the-job training opportunities.


√ √ √ P M L This may ultimately depend on the type of uses delivered, but increased access to employment, health/leisure and community facilities and services all have the potential to improve health.


_ _ _ P M L


√ √ √ P M L Increasing local community facilities has the potential to improve community vibrancy, participation, decision making and cohesion. However, consideration should be given to the impact on existing centres in any detailed proposal.




√ √ √ P M L Some such facilities may form part of a new local centre.


√ √√ √√ P H L Provision of local essential services will reduce the need to travel by the private car. Any provision should be of an appropriate scale in terms of the potential impact on the vitality and viability of other existing town centres.


_ √ √ P H L The provision of local centres should increase local access to key resources and services by means other than the private car. There may also be some resultant improvements to public transport links.

Environmental


√ √ √ P H L The provision of local centres should increase local access to key resources and services my means other than the private car. There may be some resultant improvements to public transport links.


√ √ √ P M L Will promote development of communities with accessible services, employment, shops and leisure facilities within the allocated Special Policy Area (SPA) identified for a significant scale of new development.


? ? ? T M L The general indicative area for the local centre is partly within the Wildlife Habitat Network, and may contain some greenfield land. Therefore, any development would need to take account of the impacts on biodiversity and the natural environment. However, this is within an existing allocation, for which such issues have already been considered in general, and existing local plan policies should ensure that such impacts were sufficiently mitigated. But at present such impacts cannot be determined, therefore, it is recommended that attention be drawn to the need to address any relevant issues when the actual sites are identified.




? ? ? T M L The indicative location of the local centre is adjacent to Wakefield City AQMA. Increased development adjacent to this may impact on the extent of the AQMA depending on whether the proposed development becomes a destination, particularly considering the introduction of the Wakefield Eastern Relief Road. However, the impacts of the relief road have already been considered through its allocation and subsequent planning consent.


? ? ? T M L The indicative location of the local centre is within SFRA zones 2 and 3a, therefore the development should address this as appropriate and consider Suds and renewable energy etc. This should be highlighted as part of the allocation, but existing local plan policies provide a robust framework for addressing such issues should they arise. This development should reduce the need to travel for residents of the new housing development. However, it is may attract existing surrounding residents who may arrive by private car. Therefore, this would need to be addressed through any future planning application.


? ? ? T M L This will depend on the specifics of the location of the development and the details of any proposal.


The site is close to Wakefield City centre and once allocated would not be subject to the impact assessment. In addition, there is currently no defined site area or boundary for this allocation. Therefore, care would need to be taken that the scale of any development would not have an unacceptable impact on other existing surrounding centres, especially given that 2 Local Retail Centres (RTC132 and RTC166) are now also proposed within the Special Policy Area allocation. However, given the scale of new residential development proposed within the Special Policy Area, it may be possible to justify the need for a new District Centre along with 2 Local Retail Centres within the allocation in order to make the new communities more sustainable. This would provide local employment, facilities and services for residents of the new houses within the SPA, with community and sustainable transport benefits. However, environmental effects are more uncertain at this time and would be dependent on the specific location/details of any proposal.



Option: RTC123 Amended (Accept)

WMDC: Presumption against hot food takeaways within 400 metres of schools outside centres identified on the Policies Map (amended to allow hot food takeaways to be considered on their own merits in villages listed in the settlement hierarchy)


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g Te

rm

Pe

rman

en

ce

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


X X X P M D Deterring new businesses may reduce the creation of new local employment opportunities


X X X P M D May reduce the number of potential new takeaway businesses opening in the district, by reducing their potential customer base and, thereby, reducing their viability

Social


_ _ _ P M D


√√ √√ √√ P M D Would reduce the convenience of access for school children to less healthy meal options, particularly at lunch time. This will help address overweight/obesity problems within the district.


_ _ _ P M D




√ √ √ P M D The amendments to this option increase the opportunity for local village communities to participate in the planning decision making process if and when new applications are submitted.


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D The changes to this option ensure that the policy would not be as restrictive as before in limiting access to facilities in less accessible locations.


_ _ _ P M D

Environmental


_ _ _ P M D


√ √ √ P M D May have positive benefits in terms of protecting the character of a particular area.



development


_ _ _ P M D


√ √ √ P M D May help to reduce localised issues of noise, odour and litter.


_ _ _ P M D The changes to the policy making it less restrictive in villages will help to mitigate the need to travel by private car to access such facilities in areas that are generally less accessible.


_ _ _ P M D


This policy has been amended since the Consultation Draft version to allow hot food takeaways to be considered on their own merits in villages listed in the settlement hierarchy in recognition of the fact that they may be the only facility for some distance and as such may enhance the accessibility of villages to such facilities. This will help to mitigate the need to travel by private car to access such facilities in less accessible areas where there may nevertheless be a certain level of demand for hot food takeaways. This will have positive implications in addressing transport related air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions. This option may be detrimental to the potential for new business development. However, it would have a positive impact for the health of local school children, by restricting their access to less healthy meal options at lunch times.




Small Scale Rural Offices/Development - Accepted


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g Te

rm

Pe

rman

en

ce

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P H D Will enable an appropriate scale of business development and rural enterprise will be supported whilst ensuring that larger scale development will be directed to more sustainable town centre locations, thus supporting sustainable local employment opportunities.


√ √ √ P H D Will enable an appropriate scale of business development and rural enterprise will be supported whilst ensuring that larger scale development will be directed to more sustainable town centre locations.

Social


√ √ √ P M D Good quality employment opportunities will support education and training opportunities.


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


√ √ √ P M D Will support community vibrancy by supporting the provision of local facilities at an appropriate scale.




√ √ √ P M D Will support the provision of local facilities at an appropriate scale which may include some culture, leisure and recreation facilities.

SA8 Local needs met locally √ √ √ P M D Will support the provision of local facilities at an appropriate scale.


_ _ _ P M D

Environmental


_ _ _ P M D


√ √ √ P M D Will support the efficient re-use of land and buildings with associated positive benefits for the built environment. Will ensure that development is of an appropriate scale in terms of its location and thus helping to reduce the ned to travel.


_ _ _ P M D

SA13 Minimal pollution levels √ √ √ P M D Will support a reduction in transport related air pollution by providing local facilities that help reduce the need to travel by private car.


√ √ √ P M D Should help to minimise transport related greenhouse gas emissions by reducing the need to travel by private car.




? ? ? T M D This will be dependent on the details of individual development proposals.


The option supports rural offices and other rural development of an appropriate scale, whilst ensuring that larger scale development will be directed to more sustainable town centre locations. This option would therefore, be positive for the local economy, local employment and local training opportunities. This will benefit community vibrancy, and help reduce the need to travel. In turn this will help in addressing air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions for the benefit of health and climate change.

Option: RTC168 (Reject)

Policy to protect and promote cultural facilities in town centres.


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g Te

rm

Pe

rman

en

ce

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D

Social




_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D

SA8 Local needs met locally _ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D

Environmental


_ _ _ P M D

SA11 A quality built environment that protects and enhances its historic assets, and efficient land use patterns that make good use of derelict sites, minimise travel

_ _ _ P M D



and promote balanced development


_ _ _ P M D

SA13 Minimal pollution levels _ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


Existing policies in the Local Development Framework enable the issues raised in the proposed policy to be adequately addressed. As such, it is unlikely that the proposed policy would have any significant impact on the existing baseline situation.



Option: RTC169 (Reject)

Policy to require contributions/tariff from large out-of-town businesses to subsidise car parking fees in Pontefract town centre.


Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g Te

rm

Pe

rman

en

ce

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D

Social


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D




_ _ _ P M D

SA8 Local needs met locally _ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D

Environmental


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D

SA13 Minimal pollution levels _ _ _ P M D


_ _ _ P M D




_ _ _ P M D


This policy is beyond the scope of the local plan, and as such could not be considered to have any significant impacts within the local plan appraisal framework.



Appendix C: Appraisal of Site / Area Based Options

Initial Sustainability Appraisal Site / Area Based Options

Site Reference Site Area (ha)

Site Name Proposed Land Use Sustainability Appraisal Site Commentary/Constraints

Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Wakefield

RTC1 (Rejected)

4.13 Batley Road Wakefield

Local Retail centre (supported by Aldi Store Consent)

√√ √√ √ ? The option is in an accessible location in Alverthorpe, in the SRC of Wakefield and includes a number of local shops and facilities. The option is in the 10% most deprived SOAs in terms of income, employment and health. The option is in AQMA3 and MSA6. The option would help to protect local shops, facilities and services, and may attract further appropriate development, with associated employment and training opportunities and could help to improve the quality of the local built environment. However, intensification of development may attract further vehicular trips, which could have detrimental impacts on air quality and climate change. Consideration should be given to how this might be mitigated.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC3 (Rejected)

2.01 Stanbridge Lane, Sandal

Allocate as Neighbourhood Centre

√√ √ √ ? This is an existing retail area in an accessible location in Sandal in the SRC of Wakefield. The option omits Asda, the public house and the small parade of shops. The site is within SFRA flood risk zones 2, 3a and 3b. The majority of the area is within AQMA3. The option would help to protect locally accessible shops, facilities and services, and may attract further appropriate development and investment, with associated employment and training opportunities. The option may also help to protect and enhance the quality of the built environment. However, any intensification of development may attract further vehicular trips, which could have detrimental impacts on air quality and climate change. Consideration should be given to how this might be mitigated. Any future development would also need to take account of the flood risk within the area.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC4 (Rejected)

1.4 Asdale Road (west of Asda) Sandal

Allocate for retail use.

? √ √√ ×× This is a greenfield site in the Green Belt, adjacent to the settlement boundary of the SRC of Wakefield in Sandal. The option would result in an extension to the existing retail area. The site is in AQMA3. The option would increase local employment and training opportunities, and enhance the provision of local facilities and services. However, the scale of the additional development in this location may divert employment and investment opportunities from Wakefield City Centre. Therefore, any allocation should consider whether the potential impacts would justify restrictions to the scale of comparison goods trade. An increase in retail development of this scale would attract additional vehicular trips, with implications for local air quality, and climate change mitigation. Consideration should, therefore, be given to how sustainable transport requirements might be incorporated into any allocation.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC5 (Rejected)

2.22 Land at Asdale Road (East of Asda), Sandal

Allocate for retail use.

? √ √√ ×× This is a greenfield site in the Green Belt, adjacent to the settlement boundary of the SRC of Wakefield in Sandal. The option would result in an extension to the existing retail area. The majority of the site is within SFRA flood zones 2 and 3b. The site is within AQMA3. The option would increase local employment and training opportunities, and enhance the provision of local facilities and services. However, the scale of the additional development in this location may divert employment and investment opportunities from Wakefield City Centre. Therefore, any allocation should consider whether the potential impacts would justify restrictions to the scale of comparison goods trade. An increase in retail development of this scale would attract additional vehicular trips, with implications for local air quality, and climate change mitigation. Consideration should, therefore, be given to how sustainable transport requirements might be incorporated into any allocation. Any development would also need to take account of drainage and flooding implications, given the location of the site in flood zones





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC6 (Rejected)

6.7 Asdale Road, Sandal

Allocate as Neighbourhood Centre

? √ √√ ? This is an existing retail area in an accessible location in Sandal in the SRC of Wakefield. The option includes Asda, but omits the public house and the small parade of shops. The site is within SFRA flood risk zones 2 and 3b. The option is within AQMA3, and includes a strip if Green Belt land to the north of Asda. The option would help to protect locally accessible shops, facilities and services, and may attract further appropriate development and investment, with associated employment and training opportunities. However, it may be relevant to restrict the scale of any additional comparison goods sales from the site, to reduce the potential impact on Wakefield City Centre. The option may also help to protect and enhance the quality of the built environment. However, any intensification of development may attract further vehicular trips, which could have detrimental impacts on air quality and climate change. Consideration should be given to how this might be mitigated. Any future development would also need to take account of the flood risk within the area.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC7 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy DC1)

7.11 Asdale Road, Sandal

Allocate as District Centre

? √ √√ ? This is an existing retail area in an accessible location in Sandal in the SRC of Wakefield. This option includes all the existing shops, restaurants/pubs, facilities and services in the locality. The option is within AQMA3 and SFRA flood risk zones 2, 3a and 3b. The option would help to protect locally accessible shops, facilities and services, and may attract further appropriate development and investment, with associated employment and training opportunities. However, it may be relevant to restrict the scale of any additional comparison goods sales from the site, to reduce the potential impact on Wakefield City Centre. The option may also help to protect and enhance the quality of the built environment. However, any intensification of development may attract further vehicular trips, which could have detrimental impacts on air quality and climate change. Consideration should be given to how this might be mitigated. Any future development would also need to take account of the flood risk within the area.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC9 (Rejected)

0.39 Northgate car park

Provide long stay parking

− × ×× ×× The option relates to an existing car park in the SRC of Wakefield, within the boundary of the CWAAP, which directs long stay car parking outside the Emerald Ring. The suggestion was that long stay parking provision would be used by people continuing their journey by bus. However, the option is within AQMA3, and is likely to encourage more commuters into the City by private vehicles, thereby increasing problems of congestion and air pollution, with associated implications for air quality, health and climate change. The option is within an area of health deprivation. The option is also in a priority neighbourhood, with associated income and employment deprivation. However, the option is unlikely to have a significant impact on local employment opportunities.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC10 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy LRC16)

1.09 Doncaster Road, Wakefield

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ ?/- The option includes an existing parade of local shops along Doncaster Road, in the SRC of Wakefield. The option is adjacent to Conservation Area 27, Wakefield Waterfront and AS87, Class II Quarter House Yard. The option is partly within SFRA zones 2 and 3b. The option is within AQMA3, HSE middle and outer zone HO731. The option is within the Belle Vue priority neighbourhood, with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option would help to project local shops, facilities and services accessible to local residents. The option would help to protect existing employment opportunities and may help to encourage further local investment. The option may also help to support improvements to the quality of the built environment adjacent to the conservation area. Given that the option is within an AQMA, additional trips by the private car should be discouraged. However, the small scale localised nature of the facilities are unlikely to generate significant additional journeys.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.81 Busy Corner, Barnsley Road

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ ?/- The option includes an existing area of local shops around the junction of Barnsley Road and Manygates Lane, in the urban area of the SRC if Wakefield. The option is within AQMA3. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. Any additional investment and development in the locality should be of a scale not to attract a significant amount of additional vehicular trips, in the interests of local air quality, health and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


1.53 Westgate End, Wakefield

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ ?/- The option covers a parade of local shops, food and drink establishments and other businesses at the end of Westgate in the SRC of Wakefield at the boundary with the CWAAP. The option includes part of the Lower Westgate Conservation Area and a grade II listed building. The majority of the area is within SFRA zones 2 and 3a. The option is within AQMA3 and an area of health deprivation. The option would help to protect locally accessible shops, facilities and services for surrounding residents, with associated employment. The option would also support new appropriate employment and investment. The option may also help to support improvements to the quality of the built environment around the conservation area along this gateway route. Given that the option is within an AQMA, additional trips by the private car should be discouraged. However, the small scale localised nature of the facilities are unlikely to generate significant additional journeys, especially given that the area is so close to the City Centre, with its wider appeal. Any additional development within the locality would need to take appropriate account of the flood risk in the area.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


1.27 Horbury Road, Wakefield

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ ?/- The option includes a parade of local shops, food and drink establishments and other businesses at the start of Horbury Road in the SRC of Wakefield. The option includes a Grade II Listed Building, a small area of the WLHN, a small strip of the Grade II Thornes Park Historic Landscape (HL6) and a TPO. Part of the option is within SFRA zones 2 and 3a. The option is within AQMA3. The option is within an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The option would help to protect locally accessible shops, facilities and services for surrounding residents, with associated employment. The option would also support new appropriate employment and investment. The option may also help to support improvements to the quality of the built environment in an area with some historic significance. Given that the option is within an AQMA, additional trips by the private car should be discouraged. However, the small scale localised nature of the facilities are unlikely to generate significant additional journeys, especially given that the area is so close to the City Centre, with its wider appeal. Any additional development within the locality would need to take appropriate account of the flood risk in the area. Development would also need to take account of the ecological and historic landscape designations.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.54 Agbrigg Road, Wakefield

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ ?/- The option includes a parade of local shops, food and drink establishments and other businesses along Agbrigg Road, in the Wakefield Urban Area. Part of the site is within SFRA flood zone 2. The site is within AQMA3. The option would help to protect locally accessible shops, facilities and services for surrounding residents, with associated employment. The option would also support new appropriate employment and investment. The option may also help to support improvements to the quality of the built environment. Given that the option is within an AQMA, additional trips by the private car should be discouraged. However, the small scale localised nature of the facilities are unlikely to generate significant additional journeys. Any additional development within the locality would need to take appropriate account of the flood risk in the area.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Stanley/ Outwood

RTC8 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy DC2)

1.72 Cobham Parade, Outwood

Allocate as District Centre

√ √ √√ ? The option includes an existing area of local shops along Leeds Road, in the Urban Area of Stanley/ Outwood. The option is on a regular main bus route, and surrounded by residential development and is therefore, relatively accessible by sustainable modes of transport. The option is within AQMA3 and an area of health deprivation (20% most deprived SOA). The option would help to protect locally accessible shops, facilities and services, and may attract further appropriate development and investment, with associated employment and training opportunities. The option may also help to improve the quality of the built environment. However, given that the option is within the AQMA, the scale of any additional development should be such that it would not attract a significant amount of additional vehicular trips, in the interests of local air quality, climate change and health.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Castleford

RTC15 (UDP CAS57) (Accept)

5.51 Castleford Town Centre

Retail Policy Area (development in accordance with S1)

√ √ √ √ The option covers the main shopping area within the town centre of Castleford. Supporting retail development in accordance with policy S1 will help to support the provision and retention of facilities and services in a central location, accessible by sustainable modes of transport. The option is in AQMO12007, and in an area of flood risk. The option is affected by employment and health deprivation. The option will support town centre retailing and employment in the interest of viability and vitality and community vibrancy. However, additional demand for town centre retail is expected to be limited and there is a concentration of vacant units towards the junction of Carlton Street and Albion Street. These may benefit from consideration for other appropriate uses to revitalise the locality. Protecting centrally accessible facilities will have positive benefits for air quality, climate change and health. The option should also have positive benefits for the built environment, subject to consideration being given to vacant units, which may also raise safety and security concerns. Any new development should take account of flood risk.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC16 (UDP CAS58) (Accepted) (New Policy PSF1)

0.69 Castleford Primary Shopping Frontages (development in accordance with S6)

√√ √√ √ √ This option covers the existing primary shopping frontages in Castleford Town Centre. The option is within an AQMO, employment and health deprivation. Vacancy rates are currently low in this area, and restricting non-retail uses in this accessible location will help to maintain the character and function on the area, in the interests of town centre vitality and viability and community vibrancy. The option will also help to support centrally accessible employment opportunities. Supporting town centre retailing will also help to encourage the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality, health and climate change.

RTC17 (UDP CAS 77) (Reject)

3.2 Albion Street/Powell Street

Possible Development Site (for retail/leisure and town centre expansion)

√ √ √ √ The site is in Castleford town centre and encompasses the bus station, which has been partly redeveloped to create a new transport interchange, therefore, it would not be appropriate to allocate the entire site. The site is in an AQMO and in an area of employment (20% SOA) and health (20% SOA) deprivation. The remainder of the site includes the train station, retail, leisure and community facilities. The redevelopment of the remainder of the site for appropriate town centre uses would provide facilities that are accessible by sustainable means of transport, in a central location, and would provide additional local employment opportunities. This





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

would help to address local air quality, health and climate change. The option would also support improvements to the quality of the built environment. However, it may be relevant to retain some of the existing accessible facilities such as the health centre.

RTC115 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy DEV4)

2.28 Albion Street/Powell Street Castleford

WMDC Possible Development Site

√ √ √ √ The option constitutes a reduced site area of CAS77, excluding the bus station. The site is in an AQMO and in an area of employment (20% SOA) and health (20% SOA) deprivation. The redevelopment of the remainder of the site for appropriate town centre uses would provide facilities that are accessible by sustainable means of transport, in a central location, and would provide additional local employment opportunities. This would help to address local air quality, health and climate change. The option would also support improvements to the quality of the built environment. However, it may be relevant to retain some of the existing accessible facilities such as the health centre.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC18 (UDP) (Reject)


Town Centre Boundary

√ √ √ √ This option covers existing town centre retail, office, leisure and transport links, it also covers a significant area of residential development to the south of the railway line. The option links to the Castleford Riverside regeneration area (SPA4) and is within the wider Castleford Growth Delivery Plan area. A small part of the option falls within an area of flood risk. The option is within an AQMO and in an area of employment (20% SOA) and health (20% SOA) deprivation. The option is adjacent to a Class II archaeological site AS3. The option would ensure that appropriate uses are directed towards the town centre, in the interests of town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy and local employment. This would support sustainable transport, and help to address local air quality, health and climate change. The option would also support improvements to the quality of the built environment. However, expansion of town centre uses into the residential area, south of the railway line, is unlikely in the current economic climate, and given the close proximity of out of town retail/leisure at Xscape. Therefore, the retention of this area within the town centre boundary is unlikely to directly support the vitality and viability of the town centre, other than local residents' spend.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC19 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy TC1)


WMDC Town Centre Inset Map Boundary

√√ √√ √ √ This option covers existing town centre retail, office, leisure and transport links, but omits the residential area to the south of the railway line, and extends further north to create better links with the Castleford Riverside regeneration area (SPA4), to provide alignment and consistency with the Castleford Growth Delivery Plan. This option also links with the Aire Street/ Lock Lane junction improvements (TS3). A small part of the option falls within an area of flood risk and the WLHN. The option is within an AQMO and in an area of employment (20% SOA) and health (20% SOA) deprivation. The option includes a grade II listed building, and is adjacent to a Class II archaeological site AS3. The option would ensure that appropriate uses are directed towards the town centre, in the interests of town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy and local employment. This would support sustainable transport, and help to address local air quality, health and climate change. The option would also support improvements to the quality of the built environment. Omitting the residential area to the south provides a better alignment to the existing and likely future direction of development. The option also provides much stronger strategic links with the regeneration aspirations for Castleford and the riverside,





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

which will deliver social, environmental and economic benefits for the town.

RTC20 (GVA) (Rejected in Initial SA, Accepted in Final SA) (New Policy RPA1)


GVA Retail Policy Area

√√ √√ √ √ The option covers the main shopping area within the town centre of Castleford. Supporting retail development in accordance with policy S1 will help to support the provision and retention of facilities and services in a central location, accessible by sustainable modes of transport. The option is in AQMO12007, and in an area of flood risk. The option is affected by employment and health deprivation. The option will support town centre retailing and employment in the interest of viability and vitality and community vibrancy. The option, omits the area to the west where there is a concentration of vacant units towards the junction of Carlton Street and Albion Street. Given that additional demand for town centre retail is expected to be limited, this would help to facilitate the reuse of these premises for other non-retail main town centre uses, to revitalise the locality. Protecting centrally accessible facilities will have positive benefits for air quality, climate change and health. The option should also have positive benefits for the built environment, safety and security and the efficient use of brownfield land. Any new development should take account of flood risk.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC21 (GVA) (Rejected)

0.06 Castleford GVA Primary Shopping Frontage

√√ √√ √ √ This option proposes removing the primary shopping frontage from Carleton Lanes Shopping Centre and retaining the existing frontage along the pedestrianised section of Carleton Street. Given that there is unlikely to be a significant quantitative expansion in retail within the town centre, this will support greater flexibility of town centre uses, accessible by sustainable modes of transport, to support vitality and viability, and community vibrancy going forward. The option would also support increased diversity in local employment, in an area of employment deprivation. This will support the quality of the built environment, efficient land use patterns and reduce the need to travel. Will help address transport related air and noise pollution with knock on health benefits in the Castleford AQMA and an area of health deprivation. The option will also support a reduction in transport related greenhouse gas emissions, supporting climate change objectives.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


1.44 Aire Street, Castleford


√√ √√ √ √ This option covers existing areas of car parking and the market hall to the north of the retail policy area. A small area of the north of the site is within SFRA zone 2 and 3a. The site is in an AQMO. The site is adjacent to the planned Aire Street/ Lock Lane junction improvements. The option is in the 20% most deprived SOAs in terms of health and employment. The redevelopment of the site for main town centre uses would provide a strategic link between the retail policy area and the Castleford Riverside regeneration area (SPA4), therefore, support regeneration in Castleford. The option would also support increased diversity in local employment, in an accessible town centre location, in an area of employment deprivation. The option would support the quality of the built environment, efficient land use patterns and reduce the need to travel. This will help address transport related air and noise pollution with knock on health benefits in the Castleford AQMO and an area of health deprivation. The option will also support a reduction in transport related greenhouse gas emissions, supporting climate change objectives. Any redevelopment would need to take account of the flood risk in the area, and promote sustainable transport.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.52 Bridge Street, Castleford


√√ √√ √ √ This option covers existing areas of car parking to the east of the existing retail policy area. A small area of the north of the site is within flood zone 2 and 3. The site is in an AQMO, and the the 20% most deprived SOAs in terms of employment. The redevelopment of the site for main town centre uses would provide a strategic link between the retail policy area and the Castleford Riverside regeneration area (SPA4), therefore, support regeneration in Castleford. The option would also support increased diversity in local employment, in an accessible town centre location, in an area of employment deprivation. The option would support the quality of the built environment, efficient land use patterns and reduce the need to travel. This will help address transport related air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, in the AQMO, supporting climate change objectives. Any redevelopment would need to take account of the flood risk in the area, and promote sustainable transport.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


2.91 Castleford Waterfront


√√ √√ √ √ The option covers the land adjacent to the river, north of the existing town centre boundary, encompassing the historic Queen's Mill, which is currently subject to plans for refurbishment and redevelopment for cultural, retail and leisure uses. The option is partly within the WLHN along the river corridor. The option includes a grade II listed building and is adjacent to AS3 Class II archaeological site. The option is within SFRA flood zones 2 and 3a and flood zones 2 and 3. The option is within an AQMO. The option is adjacent to the strategic junction improvements for Aire Street/ Lock Lane and the Aire and Calder Cycleway. The option is also within an area of health and employment deprivation. The redevelopment of the site for main town centre uses would provide a natural extension of the town centre towards the historic waterfront, and provide a strategic link to the Castleford Riverside regeneration area (SPA4). The option would support the planned regeneration of the historic waterfront and regeneration of the wider Castleford area. The option would also support increased diversity in local employment, in an accessible town centre location, in an area of employment deprivation. The option would support improvements to the quality of the built, historic environment, efficient land use





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

patterns and reduce the need to travel. This will help address transport related air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, in the AQMO, supporting climate change objectives. Any redevelopment would need to take account of the flood risk in the area, the ecological value of the WLHN and the river, and promote sustainable transport.

RTC25 (Rejected)

3.47 Nestle Site, Weldon Road, Castleford

Retail ? − ? × The site is a former factory outside the town centre boundary, and is allocated in the Site Specific Policies Local Plan for housing development as part of the wider Castleford Riverside Special Policy Area (SPA4). The redevelopment of a site of this scale for retail, in this edge of centre location, may be detrimental to the vitality and viability of the town centre, due to the potential trade draw, given that there is no predicted need for an increase in provision during the plan period. The majority of the site is in SFRA flood zone 3a and 2. Whilst the site is relatively close to the town centre transport links, there may be concerns about the scale of additional vehicular trips that a retail development in this edge of centre location might attract. This may have knock on effects for the adjacent AQMO. This would raise concerns about transport related air pollution and





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

greenhouse gas emissions, with associated impacts on climate change. Any development would need to take account of the high flood risk.


0.86 The Square, Airedale

Local Retail Centre √ √√ √ √ The option covers the existing parade of shops in the residential area of Airedale, Castleford. The option is in Airedale Ferry Fryston Priority Neighbourhood, with associated employment, income and health deprivation. The option would help to protect shops, facilities and services that are accessible by sustainable modes of transport in this Priority Neighbourhood. This will support local employment, community vibrancy and may also attract further investment. The option supports a quality built environment, sustainable land use patterns, and addressing transport related climate change emissions.


1.35 Castle Parade, Castleford

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option covers an existing parade of shops along Front Street, in a residential area of Castleford, adjacent to Carr Wood Road Industrial Estate, Glasshoughton (EZ8). The option includes a grade II listed building and is partly within the Castleford AQMO. The option would help to protect shops, facilities and services that are accessible by sustainable modes of transport in this residential area. This will support local employment, community vibrancy and may also attract further investment. The option





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

supports a quality built environment, sustainable land use patterns, and addressing transport related climate change emissions.

RTC150 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy TS11)

2 Aire Street, Castleford

Local Road Network Scheme

√ √ ? ? The option would provide improvements to the highway along Aire Street between Bridge Street and Church Street. The option would link with strategic junction improvements, proposed development sites, a special policy area and the extended town centre boundary. The option is within an AQMO and partly within SFRA zones 3a and 2. The option would provide strategic regeneration benefits and improve traffic flow. However, consideration should be given to any impact that the proposal might have on air quality, sustainable transport and flood risk. The option has the potential to improve the urban environment.

RTC151 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy EPR1)

0.26 Train Station- Carlton Street

Enhanced Pedestrian Route

√ √ √ √ The option relates to an enhanced pedestrian route between the Castleford train station and the town centre shopping area. There is an interchange improvement policy in place for the train station/ bus station. The route is in the AQMO and passes buildings of local interest. The option is in an area of employment and health deprivation. The option would improve access to sustainable transport, improve the quality of the urban environment and improve access to local shopping





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

facilities. This would have knock on effects for health, town centre vitality, air quality and climate.

Normanton

RTC28 (UDP) (Reject)

3.02 Normanton Town Centre

(UDP) Town Centre Inset Map Boundary

√ √ √ √ The option connects to the Normanton Stations Special Policy Area (SPA9), which is allocated as a mixed use area for regeneration. This option covers existing high street, market and bus stops. The option is adjacent to the two town centre supermarkets (Asda and Lidl), but does not include them. The option would ensure that appropriate uses are directed towards the town centre, in the interests of town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy and local employment. The option would also support sustainable transport and improvements to the quality of the built environment. However, including the two supermarkets in the town centre boundary would demonstrate their importance in supporting the vitality and viability of the town centre claiming a significant amount of the market share of main food shopping from the catchment (38.1%).





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


10.01 Normanton Town Centre

(WMDC) Town Centre Inset Map Boundary

√√ √ √ √ The option extends the town centre boundary to connect with and include parts of the Normanton Stations Special Policy Area (SPA9), which is allocated as a mixed use area for regeneration. This option covers existing high street, market and bus stops, and also includes the two supermarkets (Asda and Lidl) at either end of the high street, which provide significant convenience retail offer in central Normanton. The option is adjacent to the two town centre supermarkets, but does not include them. The option would ensure that appropriate uses are directed towards the town centre, in the interests of town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy and local employment. The option would also support sustainable transport and improvements to the quality of the built environment. Town centre vacancy rates are currently low, and Including the two supermarkets in the town centre boundary acknowledges their importance in supporting the vitality and viability of the town given their market share of main food shopping from the catchment.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC30 (UDP NOR32) (Rejected)

3.02 Normanton Retail Policy Area (development in accordance with S1 and S2)

√ √ √ √ The option connects to the Normanton Stations Special Policy Area (SPA9), which is allocated as a mixed use area for regeneration. The option also extends the town centre boundary to housing allocation HS47. This option covers existing high street, market and bus stops. The option is adjacent to the two town centre supermarkets (Asda and Lidl), but does not include them. The option would ensure that retail development is directed towards the town centre, in the interests of town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy and local employment. The option would also support sustainable transport and improvements to the quality of the built environment. However, including the two supermarkets in the town centre boundary would demonstrate their importance in supporting the vitality and viability of the town centre claiming a significant amount of the market share of main food shopping from the catchment (38.1%).





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC31 (NOR33) (Rejected)

0.5 Normanton Primary Shopping Frontages (development in accordance with S6)

√ √ √ √ This option covers the existing Primary Shopping Frontage along the High Street, and includes the existing market to the western end of the high street. Normanton currently has low vacancy rates within the primary shopping frontage. Therefore, continuing to restrict non-retail uses in the Primary Shopping Frontage will ensure that the town centre retains a primarily retail character, in support of the vitality and viability of the town centre. This will benefit the local economy, maintaining centrally accessible facilities and services, reducing the need to travel and supporting the quality of the built environment. However, retaining the market in this policy area may be unduly restrictive given that the market it only intermittent.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC32 (GVA) (Accepted) (New Policy RPA3)

4.02 Normanton (GVA) Retail Policy Area

√√ √ √ √ The option connects to the Normanton Stations Special Policy Area (SPA9), which is allocated as a mixed use area for regeneration. This option covers existing high street, market and bus stops, and also includes the two supermarkets (Asda and Lidl) at either end of the high street, which provide significant convenience retail offer in central Normanton. The option is adjacent to the two town centre supermarkets, but does not include them. The option would ensure that appropriate uses are directed towards the town centre, in the interests of town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy and local employment. The option would also support sustainable transport and improvements to the quality of the built environment. Town centre vacancy rates are currently low, and Including the two supermarkets in the town centre boundary acknowledges their importance in supporting the vitality and viability of the town given their market share of main food shopping from the catchment.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC33 (GVA) (Accepted) (New Policy PSF3)

0.43 Normanton (GVA) Primary Shopping Frontage

√√ √ √ √ This option covers the existing Primary Shopping Frontage along the High Street, and but excludes the existing market to the western end of the high street. Normanton currently has low vacancy rates within the primary shopping frontage. Therefore, continuing to restrict non-retail uses in the Primary Shopping Frontage will ensure that the town centre retains a primarily retail character, in support of the vitality and viability of the town centre. This will benefit the local economy, maintaining centrally accessible facilities and services, reducing the need to travel and supporting the quality of the built environment. Furthermore, removing the market from the policy area will increase the flexibility for other temporary uses for this area, which will support the vitality and viability of the town centre.


0.27 Market Place to Normanton Station


√ √ √ √ The option would provide improvements to the urban, pedestrian environment between the retail policy area/ main shopping high street, the Lidl supermarket and the Special policy Area. The option would promote sustainable transport, improvements to the urban environment and strategic links between the retail policy area and strategic regeneration sites. This would have knock on effects for town centre vitality and viability, health, town centre vitality, air quality and climate.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Featherstone

RTC34 (UDP) (Rejected)

4.47 Featherstone Town Centre Boundary

√ √ √ √ The option links with SPA10 allocated for housing and B1 employment. This option is the existing defined town centre boundary and covers the main shopping high street of Featherstone, Station Lane. The option is within an AQMO, and an area of employment and health deprivation. The option would support centrally accessible local facilities, and services and employment. This will support the vitality and viability of the town centre. Retaining centrally accessible facilities and services will help reduce the need to travel, with associated benefits for air quality and climate change. The option would also help to supporting quality and character of the built environment.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC35 (rtcee110) (Rejected)

0.71 Featherstone Town Centre Inset Map Boundary

× × × × The option is within an AQMO, and is in a priority neighbourhood, with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option covers the cross roads at Pontefract Road and Station Lane, and only encompasses the southern row of properties within the existing town centre boundary. The option does not include the existing, significant high street retail area. Reducing the town centre boundary to this scale would compromise the integrity of the town centre as it would leave existing facilities and services vulnerable to change of use for non-town centre purposes. This loss of locally accessible facilities and services would compromise the vitality and viability of the town centre, would be detrimental to community vibrancy, it would also increase need to travel, with associated negative impacts for air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


4.6 Featherstone Town Centre Inset Map Boundary

√ √ √ √ The option links with SPA10 allocated for housing and B1 employment. The option includes an additional retail unit to the eastern boundary on Pontefract Road. The option excludes a strip of highway verge at the northern boundary, and realigns part of the western boundary at Maxwell Street, to follow the accurate property boundaries. The option covers the main shopping high street of Featherstone, Station Lane. The option is within an AQMO, and an area of employment and health deprivation. The option would support centrally accessible local facilities, and services and employment. This will support the vitality and viability of the town centre. Retaining centrally accessible facilities and services will help reduce the need to travel, with associated benefits for air quality and climate change. The option would also help to supporting quality and character of the built environment.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC37 (UDP FTH28) (Rejected)

4.77 Featherstone Retail Policy Area (Development in accordance with Policy S1 & S2)

× × × × This option is the existing defined retail policy area and covers the main shopping high street of Featherstone, Station Lane. It does not extend to the existing small supermarket on Girnhill Lane. The option is within an AQMO, and an area of employment and health deprivation. Given the current performance of the town, its role in convenience and comparison provision, and recent permissions for food stores in the town; retaining the existing retail policy area may be too restrictive in preventing viable re-uses of central units. This may be detrimental to the future vitality and viability of the centre. This would have knock on effects in terms of provision of local employment, facilities and services, and could potentially increase the need to travel to access facilities and services. This would have knock on effects for transport related air pollution, health and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


3.07 Featherstone Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ The option links with SPA10 allocated for housing and B1 employment. The option is within an AQMO, and an area of employment and health deprivation. The option sits within the town centre boundary, but significantly reduces the existing retail policy area. This would support the reuse of town centre units for a wider variety of alternative main town centre uses, whilst retaining a retail core. Such diversification would support the vitality and viability of the town centre, providing locally accessible facilities and services in the interests of community vibrancy. Supporting central facilities will should benefit the quality of the built environment, make efficient land use patterns and reduce the need to travel. This will support reductions in transport related air and noise pollution with knock-on benefits for health and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC39 (rtcee110) (Rejected)

0.7 Featherstone Retail Policy Area × × × × The option is within an AQMO, and is in a priority neighbourhood, with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option covers the cross roads at Pontefract Road and Station Lane, and only encompasses the southern row of properties within the existing town centre boundary. The option does not include the existing, significant high street retail area. Reducing the retail policy area to this small locality that does not encompass any significant existing retail, would compromise the integrity of the retail offer in the town centre as it would leave existing facilities and services vulnerable to change of use to non-retail/ town centre purposes. This loss of locally accessible facilities and services would compromise the vitality and viability of the town centre, would be detrimental to community vibrancy, it would also increase need to travel, with associated negative impacts for air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC40 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy RPA4)

3.13 Featherstone Retail Policy Area √√ √ √ √ The option links with SPA10 allocated for housing and B1 employment. The option is within an AQMO, and an area of employment and health deprivation. The option sits within the existing town centre boundary, but significantly reduces the existing retail policy area, and further excludes the properties on Clayton Court, Short Street and Allison Street. This would support the reuse of town centre units for a wider variety of alternative main town centre uses, whilst retaining a retail core. Such diversification would support the vitality and viability of the town centre, providing locally accessible facilities and services and employment in the interests of community vibrancy. Supporting central facilities should benefit the quality of the built environment, make efficient land use patterns and reduce the need to travel. This will support reductions in transport related air and noise pollution with knock-on benefits for health and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC41 (GVA) (Accepted) (PSF4)

0.21 Featherstone Primary Shopping Frontage

? ? ? ? The option is in an area of employment and health deprivation. Given the small scale of high street retailing in Featherstone, the current performance of the town, its role in convenience and comparison provision, and recent permissions for food stores in the town; introducing a new primary shopping frontage may be restrictive in preventing viable re-uses of town centre units for alternative main town centre units. This may have knock on effects in terms of provision of local employment, facilities and services, and could potentially increase the need to travel to access facilities and services, with knock on effects for transport related pollution, health and climate change.

RTC157 (WMDC) (Accepted) (DEV6)

0.71 Wilson Street, Featherstone

Possible Development Site

√ √ √ √ The option relates to a vacant site behind The Precinct off Station Lane, the main shopping high street. The option is within the town centre boundary and the retail policy area, and includes part of the proposed primary shopping frontage. The option is adjacent to a Special Policy Area. Development of the site for retail/ town centre uses would provide a link between the existing retail and the SPA. The option would provide local employment opportunities and support town centre vitality and viability. The provision of locally accessible facilities would support community vibrancy. The option





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

would improve the built environment, represent an efficient reuse of brownfield land and reduce the need to travel. This will support reductions in transport related air and noise pollution with knock-on benefits for health and climate change.

Pontefract

RTC43 (PNT56) (Rejected)

2.86 Pontefract Retention of adequate town centre car parking for shoppers

? ? × × This option applies to the existing car parks on Stuart Road at the northern town centre boundary, adjacent to the Pontefract Market Place Conservation Area. The sites are within an area of employment deprivation. Retaining town centre parking for shopping has the potential to support local business success; local employment and training opportunities; town centre vitality. However, the option would restrict development on the site for other main town centre uses, which may also improve the public realm adjacent to the Conservation Area. Furthermore, the option encourages traffic into the town centre, and does not promote the use of public transport. This results in associated air and noise pollution, with knock on effects for public health, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change. Nevertheless, the retail study identifies that there is limited requirement for further retail, office and leisure development in the town





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

centre.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC44 (UDP PNT57) (Rejected)

3.44 The Friarwood Car Park/British Rail Land to the Rear (Pontefract)

Industrial/ Light Industrial/ Warehousing

? ? ? ? The British Rail land has already been redeveloped for residential development so would no longer be available. The car park has not been redeveloped. The option is in an area of employment deprivation within the existing town centre boundary. The redevelopment of the site would result in the loss of the car parking close to Baghill train station, which may be detrimental for the use of sustainable transport for people commuting to wider parts of the district. Furthermore, B1, B2 and B8 uses are not necessarily the most appropriate uses to be directed towards the town centre. The loss of car parking may be detrimental to the vitality and viability of the town centre. However, at present this encourages traffic into the town centre. This has associated implications for air pollution, health and climate change, and does not encourage the use of sustainable transport


0.76 Spink Lane/ Micklegate/ Back Northgate

Residential/ Leisure/ Ancillary services to Castle Grounds

− − − − The option overlaps with housing site HS34. There is a TPO on the site. The site is within the Pontefract Castle Conservation Area (CA3). The option is in an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The area has now been redeveloped for housing, so is no longer available. Furthermore, this document does not seek to allocate land for housing, as this has already taken place through the adopted Site Specific Policies Local Plan





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


1.44 Jubilee Way/ Beastfair Service Road

Commercial Office or Leisure

− − − − The option is in the Pontefract Market Place Conservation Area (CA4), in an AQMO, and an area of employment deprivation. The site has been partly redeveloped for mixed use development of offices, retail and community uses, so is no longer available.

RTC48 (UDP) (Accepted) (New Policy TC2)

54.76 Pontefract UDP Town Centre Boundary

√ √ √ √ There are a number or heritage assets within the existing town centre boundary including a SAM, listed buildings, conservation areas and TPOs. Small parts of the town centre are subject to flood risk and the whole of the town centre is in an AQMO. The town centre is also subject to income, employment and health deprivation. The retail study indicates that there is limited need for additional convenience or comparison retail in the town centre. Vacancy rates are at the national average and tend towards smaller units attractive to local independents. Therefore, expansion of the town centre would not be warranted. The existing boundary encompasses the central retail, leisure, office, employment and community uses, with some peripheral residential. Therefore, retaining the existing boundary would support the integrity of the function of the town centre, and its associated uses. In turn this would support the vitality and viability of the town centre, providing locally accessible facilities and services in the interests of





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

community vibrancy. This would also benefit the quality of the built/ historic environment, make efficient land use patterns and reduce the need to travel. This will support reductions in transport related air and noise pollution with knock-on benefits for health and climate change.


0.71 The Circle, Pontefract

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option is in an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The option is in the centre of a residential area and includes a public house, local shops, facilities and services. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of health and wellbeing. The option would also help to promote a quality built environment.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.3 Baghill Lane, Pontefract

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option is in an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The option covers an existing parade of local shops and facilities within a residential area. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of health and wellbeing. The option would also help to promote a quality built environment.

RTC51 (Rejected)

0.3 Pontefract Library

Demolish library and restore medieval street pattern

?/- × × × The option includes Pontefract Market Place Conservation Area (CA4). The option is in an area of employment deprivation. Whilst demolishing the library which is circa 1970's would provide an opportunity to restore the historic street pattern. This would benefit the quality of the built historic environment, and would potentially improve the attractiveness of the town centre for investment and tourism. However, the library is currently a well-used centrally accessible community facility, and at present it unlikely that funding could be secured to relocate the facilities or build a new facility. As such, this would be detrimental to local community vibrancy and local employment, and would increase the





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

need to travel to access such facilities. This in turn would impact on transport related air pollution with knock on effects for climate change.

RTC52 (Rejected)

0.62 Salter Row, Pontefract

Possible Development Site for town centre uses

− − − − The option includes a listed building and is in the Pontefract Market Place Conservation Area (CA4). The option is in an area of employment deprivation. This area has already been redeveloped, so is no longer available.

RTC53 (Accepted) (New Policy DEV5)

0.39 North of Stuart Road, Pontefract (Pontefract Swimming Pool)

Possible Development Site for town centre uses

√ ? √ √ This is the site of the existing swimming pool on Stuart Road. The pool is to be closed which will leave the site available for redevelopment. However, in the interest of local community health and vibrancy it will be important to ensure that the facility is replaced elsewhere. The option is in an area of employment deprivation, within the town centre boundary, close to the main shopping area. The option would support increased diversity in local employment, in an accessible town centre location, in an area of employment deprivation. The option would support the vitality and viability of the town centre, along with improvements to the quality of the built, historic environment and efficient land use patterns. The site is adjacent to existing town centre car parking. However,





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

any redevelopment should take the opportunity to promote sustainable transport given the town centre location, this will help address transport related air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, supporting climate change objectives.

RTC54 (Accepted) (New Policy SPA13)

1.44 South of Stuart Road, Pontefract

Extend Special Policy Area

√ √ √ √ The option is across the road from Tanshelf Special Policy Area (SPA7), which is allocated for mixed use employment, leisure and residential to complement the town centre, to assist the regeneration of this key gateway into the town. The site is currently mostly car parking, with some leisure and employment uses. The option is in an area of employment deprivation. The extension of the special policy area would help create a strategic link between the proposed SPA and the aspirations for regeneration within the town centre. This would benefit local employment, town centre vitality and viability, along with supporting improvements to the quality of the built, historic environment and efficient land use patterns. Any redevelopment should take the opportunity to promote sustainable transport given the town centre location. This will help address transport related air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, supporting climate change objectives.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC55 (Rejected)

2.39 Horsefair, Pontefract

Possible development site

− − − − The option overlaps with the retail policy area. A significant proportion of the site includes Horse Fair Flats, which are to remain. Therefore, the site does not represent a comprehensive development proposal. The option is within the Pontefract Castle Conservation Area (CA3), and includes Horsevaults, a grade 2 listed building. The option is in an area of income, employment and health deprivation.

RTC56 (Rejected)

0.2 Micklegate, Pontefract

Possible development site

? ? √ √ The option covers a motor garage and car parking. The site is within the Pontefract Castle Conservation Area (CA3). The option is within an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The option is within a predominantly residential area, away from the retail policy area, therefore, consideration would need to be given as to what alternative main town centre uses would be viable for this site, in order to support the vitality and viability of the town centre, and community health and vibrancy. The site is in an accessible town centre location. Therefore, a new use on the site would be in a position to promote sustainable transport options in the interests of climate change. Redevelopment of the site would represent an efficient use of land and would provide an opportunity to improve the built environment.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC57 (Rejected)

0.05 Sainter's Warehouse Spink Lane Pontefract

Castle Visitor Centre √ √ √ ? The option is within an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The option is in the Pontefract Castle Conservation Area (CA3). The site is currently a warehouse at the edge of Pontefract Castle SAM (AS18). The option would provide some local employment in a sustainable location. The option may also help to promote the cultural heritage of Pontefract in the interests of community vibrancy, tourism and the local economy. However, any new building would ned to respect the conserve and enhance the historic environment. The option would be accessible by sustainable modes of transport, with associated benefits for air pollution and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC58 (Rejected)

0.18 Former Hospital Dispensary, Southgate, Pontefract

Reserved for Community Use

√ √ √ √ The option relates to the Former Hospital Dispensary, which is outside the town centre boundary. The option is partly within a Class II archaeological site (AS24), adjacent to the Hermitage which is a Grade 2 listed building and is within the Friarwood and Button Park Conservation Area (CA29). The option is also within an area of employment deprivation. The building is currently vacant. Bringing the building back into use for community facilities would be positive in relation to cultural heritage and the quality of the built environment, subject to respecting the historic designations. The option would bring positive benefits for community vibrancy, and may enhance the tourism offer in Pontefract, with associated benefits for the local economy. The option is in a relatively accessible location, therefore, the option would need to promote sustainable transport links in the interests of air quality and climate change. However, allocating the site for a community use may restrict other viable reuse of the building.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC59 (Reject)

0.1 The Court House Front Street Pontefract

Reserved for Community Use

√ √ √ √ The option relates to the former Magistrates' Court, and is currently vacant. The option is within the Pontefract Market Place Conservation Area (CA4). The option is within an area of employment deprivation. Bringing the building back into use for community facilities would be positive in relation to cultural heritage and the quality of the built environment, subject to respecting the historic designations. The option would bring positive benefits for community vibrancy, and may enhance the tourism offer in Pontefract, with associated benefits for the local economy. The option is in an accessible town centre location, therefore, would need to promote sustainable transport links in the interests of air quality and climate change. However, allocating the site for a community use may restrict other viable reuse of the building.

RTC60 (Accepted) (New Policy DIA1a)

0.83 Ropergate End to valley Road

Design Improvement Area - a

√ √ − √ The option relates to the commercial properties fronting onto the north of Southgate, which is the main route from Pontefract to Knottingley. The option is within the Pontefract Market Place Conservation Area (CA4), and an area of employment deprivation. The option is also within an AQMO. Providing design improvements within the conservation area would improve the quality of the built historic environment long this route through the town. This would benefit community vibrancy and





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

potentially benefit tourism and the local economy, with associated benefits for town centre vitality and viability. Whilst the option is central, it is unlikely to have any significant impact on sustainable transport.

RTC61 (Accepted) (New Policy DIA1b)

0.54 Valley Road to Gillygate

Design Improvement Area - b

√ √ − √ The option relates to the commercial properties fronting onto the north of Southgate, which is the main route from Pontefract to Knottingley. The option is within the Pontefract Market Place Conservation Area (CA4), and an area of employment deprivation. The option is also within an AQMO. Providing design improvements within the conservation area would improve the quality of the built historic environment long this route through the town. This would benefit community vibrancy and potentially benefit tourism and the local economy, with associated benefits for town centre vitality and viability. Whilst the option is central, it is unlikely to have any significant impact on sustainable transport.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC62 (Accepted) (New Policy DIA1c)

0.19 Slutwell Lane to Friarwood Lane, Pontefract

Design Improvement Area - c

√ √ − √ The option is on the edge of the Conservation Area, within an existing Housing allocation HS33, along the south of Southgate, the main route from Pontefract to Knottingley. The option is in an area of employment deprivation. Providing design improvements adjacent to the conservation area would improve the quality of the built historic environment long this route through the town. This would benefit community vibrancy and potentially benefit tourism and the local economy, with associated benefits for town centre vitality and viability. Whilst the option is central, it is unlikely to have any significant impact on sustainable transport.

RTC63 (Accepted) (DIA1d)

0.77 Friarwood Lane to Walkergate, Pontefract

Design Improvement Area - d

√ √ − √ The option is partly within the Pontefract Castle Conservation Area (CA3). The option is in an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The option includes an area of residential and commercial properties along the south of Southgate, the main route from Pontefract to Knottingley. Providing design improvements within and adjacent to the conservation area would improve the quality of the built historic environment long this route through the town. This would benefit community vibrancy and potentially benefit tourism and the local economy, with associated benefits for town centre vitality and viability. Whilst the





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

option is central, it is unlikely to have any significant impact on sustainable transport.


15.19 Pontefract Retail Policy Area (GVA)

− − ? ? This option omits the properties to the north west of the existing Retail Policy Area, which are separated from the more central Retail policy Area. It would extend the policy area to the north up to the Town Centre Boundary, to include Morrison's Supermarket, the swimming pool and car parks. The option contains and number of heritage designations, including listed buildings, archaeological sites and Conservation Areas. The option is in an AQMO and an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The option would provide a strategic link to Tanshelf Special Policy Area. However, given that there is currently limited retail development within this northern part of the town and there is unlikely to any significant expansion in retailing, given the proximity to Glasshoughton, it is unlikely to deliver any significant economic benefits or social. The option may impact on town centre car parking, which may reduce town centre traffic with benefits for air quality, health and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC65 (Saved UDP PNT49) (Rejected)

11.21 Pontefract Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ The option includes and number of heritage designations, including listed buildings, archaeological sites and Conservation Areas. The option is in an AQMO and an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The existing retail policy area does not include the edge-of-centre Asda and Morrison's supermarkets adjacent to the retail policy area. These stores contribute to the vitality and viability of the centre claiming a significant amount of the market share of main food shopping from the Pontefract catchment (52.6%). However, the existing retail policy area is considered to be relatively sustainable by supporting local businesses and local employment; providing centralised facilities and services; reducing the need to travel with associated benefits for addressing climate change; and supports the built environment. Therefore, the existing retail policy area generally supports the vitality and viability of the town centre.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


10.73 Pontefract Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ The option largely retains the existing Retail Policy Area boundary, but omits some residential properties to the eastern boundary and some properties to the west that are separated from the main retail policy area. The option consolidates the existing retail policy area to that which is currently functional. This would provide increased flexibility for the reuse of buildings to maintain the vitality and viability of the town centre, especially given that there is no predicted expansion in demand. This would support local businesses and local employment; retain centralised facilities and services for community vibrancy; continue to support a reducing the need to travel with associated benefits for addressing climate change; and supports the built environment. Therefore, the amended retail policy area would generally support the vitality and viability of the town centre.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.16 Pontefract Primary Shopping Frontage (GVA)

√ √ √ √ The option proposes to reduce the primary shopping frontage to the east along Bridge Street and Horse Fair, and along Beastfair to the south. Then proposes to increase it along Beast Fair to the north and along Ropergate. The option includes and number of heritage designations, including listed buildings, archaeological sites and Conservation Areas. The option is in an AQMO and an area of employment deprivation. This option would protect the function of the primary shopping frontage, whilst increasing the flexibility of reuse of vacant retail units. This would support the vitality and viability of the town centre. Supporting central facilities would also benefit community vibrancy, support the quality of the built environment, and reduce the need to travel in the interests of climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC68 (Rejected) (Saved UDP Policy PNT50)

0.68 Pontefract Primary Shopping Frontages (development in accordance with S6)

? √ √ √ The option would retain the integrity of the function of the primary shopping frontage. Vacancy rates are currently average in Pontefract and there is not expected to be a significant quantitative increase in town centre retailing during the plan period. Therefore, a more flexible policy relating to primary shopping frontages would support continued town centre vitality and viability in the event of future vacancies, with associated benefits for the local economy, accessibility of facilities and services, reducing the need to travel and supporting the quality of the built environment (evidence from the RLTC study suggests that policies relating to the evening economy should be maintained and strengthened in the interests of social and environmental sustainability).





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC69 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy PSF2)

0.63 Pontefract Primary Shopping Frontage

√√ √√ √ √ This option includes a reduction in the PSF along Woolmarket, Bridge Street and Shoemarket Street, and an increase along Ropergate, to reflect the current characteristics of the units. This will increase the flexibility of re-use in some units for other town centre uses, whilst protecting the integrity of the central primary shopping frontage. The option includes and number of heritage designations, including listed buildings, archaeological sites and Conservation Areas. The option is in an AQMO and an area of employment deprivation. This would support the vitality and viability of the town centre, including supporting local employment. The option would support continued access to central facilities and services, in the interests of community vibrancy. In addition, this would support the quality of the built environment, and reducing the need to travel, with associated benefits for air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.19 Colonel's Walk - Sessions House Yard, Pontefract


√ √ √ √ The option connects SPA7 and the proposed extension to the SPA to the retail policy area, and other proposed enhanced pedestrian routes. The option is partly within an area of employment deprivation. The option would promote sustainable transport, improvements to the urban environment and strategic links between the retail policy area and strategic regeneration sites. This would have knock on effects for town centre vitality and viability, health, town centre vitality, air quality and climate. The option would need to respect the Conservation Area and the historic environment.


0.42 Stuart Road, Pontefract


√ √ √ √ The option connects SPA7 and the proposed extension to the SPA to the retail policy area, a proposed development site and other proposed enhanced pedestrian routes. The option is partly within an area of employment deprivation. The option would promote sustainable transport, improvements to the urban environment and strategic links between the retail policy area and strategic regeneration sites. This would have knock on effects for town centre vitality and viability, health, town centre vitality, air quality and climate. The option would need to respect the Conservation Area and the historic environment.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC154 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New policy TS12)

0.28 Mill Dam Lane/ North Baileygate


√ √ √ √ The option would provide capacity improvements at the junction to ease congestion. The option is in an area of health, income and employment deprivation. The option is adjacent to an employment zone, within the Castle Conservation Area and adjacent to the Castle which is a SAM, and a Class II archaeological site. Easing traffic congestion would improve the urban environment, and help improve local air quality. This would have knock on effects for health and climate change. Improved transport links may also have a small benefit to the local economy by improving the speed of traffic movements to and from local businesses. The details of the option would need to respect the historic environment.


0.28 South Baileygate/ North Baileygate


√ √ √ √ The option would provide capacity improvements at the junction to ease congestion. The option is in an area of health, income and employment deprivation. The option is within the Castle Conservation Area and adjacent to the Castle which is a SAM, and a Class II archaeological site, and a grade II* listed building. Easing traffic congestion would improve the urban environment, and help improve local air quality. This would have knock on effects for health and climate change. Improved transport links may also have a small benefit to the local economy by improving the speed of traffic movements to





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

and from local businesses. The details of the option would need to respect the historic environment.


0.28 South Baileygate/ Baghill


√ √ √ √ The option would provide capacity improvements at the junction to ease congestion. The option is in an area of health, income and employment deprivation. The option is within the Castle Conservation Area and adjacent to the Castle which is a SAM, and a Class II archaeological site, and a building of local interest. Easing traffic congestion would improve the urban environment, and help improve local air quality. This would have knock on effects for health and climate change. Improved transport links may also have a small benefit to the local economy by improving the speed of traffic movements to and from local businesses. The details of the option would need to respect the historic environment.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Knottingley


6.87 Knottingley Town Centre Inset Map Boundary

√ √ √ √ Knottingley Town centre is previously undefined by the UDP, and is essentially a parade of shops along Hill Top, a supermarket and some community uses where redevelopment is anticipated. The option is in an area of employment and health deprivation, an AQMO and partly within SFRA flood Zone 3a. Defining the boundary of the town centre will help to protect the integrity of town centre uses, in the interests of vitality and viability, local employment and the provision of accessible facilities and services. This would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, and reduce the need to travel, in the interests of air quality and climate change. The Retail Study identifies that there is no capacity for new substantive comparison retailing, due to size and competition from other larger centres nearby. In addition, a new foodstore has recently been granted. Therefore, it will be important to maintain flexibility to avoid local vacancies. Any development in SFRA zone 3a should take appropriate account of flood risk. Any new development should take account of the AQMO.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


6.87 Knottingley Retail Policy Area ? ? ? ? The option will help to direct new retail development to the centre of Knottingley. However, the option covers the whole of the proposed town centre boundary, which is not all characterised by retail uses. This may result in undue restrictions on the reuse of units to the east of the centre. This may be too restrictive in limiting alternative viable uses, which could be detrimental to vitality, community vibrancy and providing locally accessible facilities and services. This in turn may increase the need to travel, with associated impacts for air quality and climate change.


2.43 Knottingley Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ This reduced option towards the western end of the proposed town centre boundary includes the existing main retail area of the town centre. This is a less restrictive option that would support centralised retail facilities and services, in the interests of vitality and viability, community vibrancy, a quality built environment, with a reduced need to travel in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option is within an AQMO and partly within SFRA flood zone 3a, therefore, any development would need to take appropriate account of this.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.5 Knottingley Primary Shopping Frontage

√ √ √ √ This option covers the parade of shops along Hill Top, omitting the vacant units to the western end and includes the Morrison's Supermarket. The option would continue to support the primary retail units, whilst providing flexibility in the reuse of the vacant units. This would help to support vitality and viability, community vibrancy, a quality built environment with a reduced need to travel in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option is within an AQMO and partly within SFRA flood zone 3a, therefore, any development would need to take appropriate account of this.

RTC74 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New Policy PSF5)

0.3 Knottingley Primary Shopping Frontage

? ? ? ? This option covers the parade of shops along Hill top, including the vacant units and the Morrison's Supermarket. This option may be too restrictive in terms of the reuse of vacant units, given the limited identified capacity for substantive comparison retail development and the diversion of spend to the supermarkets for convenience shopping. This could compromise the vitality and viability of the town centre, with associated impacts for community vibrancy and the quality of the built environment. High vacancy rates may in turn impact on the need to travel to access facilities and services, with knock on effects for air quality and climate change. The option is within an AQMO and partly within





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

SFRA flood zone 3a, therefore, any development would need to take appropriate account of this.


0.82 Hill Top/ Glebe Lane


√√ √ √ √ The option relates to the former library and former council depot to the eastern end of the town centre on Hill Top. There is permission on the site for a new Lidl supermarket, and the library has been relocated to the adjacent sports centre. The option is in an AQMO, and an area of health and employment deprivation. This option would represent an efficient reuse of land to provide accessible convenience shopping facilities, with associated employment opportunities in an area of employment deprivation. Improving locally accessible shopping would help reduce the need to travel. This would support improvements to air quality with knock on benefits for health and climate change. Improved access to local facilities would support community vibrancy and improvements to the urban environment. The option would also have health benefits by improving access to quality fresh produce. Any redevelopment scheme would need to take account of the TPOs at the front of the site, which would have been considered as part of the consent.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


1.13 Racca Green, Knottingley

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option is adjacent to an Employment Zone, in an area of income and health deprivation, and in an AQMO. The option covers an existing area of along the junctions of Racca Green and Weeland Road, within a mostly residential area. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change, subject to managing additional trips by private vehicle. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment. Any new development within the centre would need to take account of the AQMO.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Hemsworth


6.53 Hemsworth Town Centre Boundary

× × × × The option is within an AQMA and an area of employment and health deprivation. The option covers the existing town centre boundary, defined by the UDP. Since this time there have been some significant changes in the layout of development within and on the edge of the defined centre. This includes a new supermarket, a new library and the location of the bus station. As such it may be appropriate to consider expanding the defined centre to include this new development, to acknowledge their importance in vitality and viability, community vibrancy and sustainable transport, as the present option does not offer the desired level of protection to these main town centre uses.


10.11 Hemsworth Town centre Inset Map Boundary

√ √ √ √ The option is within an AQMA and an area of employment and health deprivation. The option covers the existing town centre boundary, defined by the UDP, along with the Tesco Supermarket, which has permission for an extension to alleviate current overtrading, the library and the bus station. The retail study identifies that these are important to the vitality and viability of the town centre, but that there is no requirement to plan for quantitative or qualitative increase in provision. Therefore, this option reflects a realistic position that





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

would also support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment and sustainable travel in the interests of air quality and climate change. Any new development would need to take account of the AQMA.

RTC78 (UDP HEM51) (Rejected)

6.53 Hemsworth Retail Policy Area (S1 and S2)

× × × × The option is within an AQMA and an area of employment and health deprivation. Again the option covers the existing retail policy area, defined by the UDP, and does not include the Tesco supermarket, library and bus station. This does not acknowledge their importance to the role and function of the centre. As such it may be appropriate to consider expanding the defined retail policy area to include this new development, to support town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy, a quality built environment and sustainable transport.

RTC79 (GVA) (Reject)

8.15 Hemsworth Retail Policy Area × × √ √ This option includes the new development around the supermarket and the supermarket car park, but omits the development to the south of the town around the outdoor market. The market is failing, therefore, removing it from the retail policy area would increase the flexibility to enable a viable reuse of the site. In addition, the inclusion of the car park may be unnecessary given that there is no requirement identified for expansion in convenience and comparison. This may result in further expansion of the supermarket, impacting on other town





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

centre businesses, to the overall detriment of vitality and viability. Any redevelopment in these locations would need to take account of the AQMA.


0.12 Hemsworth Primary Shopping Frontage

? ? ? ? Hemsworth does not currently have a primary shopping frontage, and the layout and mix of units does not easily lend itself to defining one. The proposed frontage is to the north eastern area of Kirkby Road / Market Street, and includes the Iceland store. Given the scale and location of the proposed frontage and the current performance of the centre, introducing a PSF may be unduly restrictive on the re-use of units. This may affect future town centre vitality and viability, with knock on effects for community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, and the need to travel to access facilities and services.

RTC81 (WMDC) (Accepted) (new Policy RPA7)

6.04 Hemsworth Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ The option is in an AQMA and an area of employment and health deprivation. This option includes Tesco and the library, but omits the bus station and Tesco car park. This would avoid further expansion of edge of centre development that may impact on the existing centre. The option also omits the outdoor market, making it more versatile for redevelopment for an alternative use. This would support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, in the interests of community





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, providing locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for air quality and climate change. Any new development would need to take account of the AQMA.

RTC82 (Sites Plan) (Rejected)

5.55 Land between the bus station and Little Hemsworth

Special Policy Area − ? − ? The option is in an AQMA and an area of employment and health deprivation. Most of this area has already been redeveloped by Tesco. The remainder includes the primary school and playing fields which are unlikely to become available for redevelopment. Furthermore, the allocation may put pressure on the school playing fields for redevelopment. As such the option would not provide any associated sustainability benefits.


1.32 Kirkby Road, Hemsworth

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option covers Kirkby Road to the south of the existing town centre in Hemsworth. Properties consist of a mix of local businesses including retail, professional and food and drink. The option is adjacent to housing allocation HS52, and is within an area of employment and health deprivation. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment.


0.57 The Market, Kirkby Road


√√ √ √ √ The option is within the town centre boundary and the retail policy area. The option is in an area of employment and health deprivation. Redevelopment of the site would result in the loss of the existing market, which is currently unsuccessful. As such this would support improvements in town centre vitality and viability, local employment opportunities and community vibrancy. The option would represent an efficient re-use of land, and would provide central retail / town centre facilities and services that are accessible by sustainable modes of transport, reducing the need to travel. This would support improvements to air quality, with positive impacts for health and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

South Elmsall

RTC84 (UDP EMS56) (Rejected)

6.35 South Elmsall Town Centre Inset Map

Retail Policy Area (in accordance with S1 and S2)

− − − − The option is partly within SFRA zone 2 and 3a. The option is also in a priority neighbourhood with associated income, employment and health deprivation. A small proportion of the option intersects with the WLHN The option covers the existing town centre and retail policy area. This is more mixed use towards the eastern end, with transport, community, commercial and residential uses. The option would help to support the integrity of the existing central retailing. However, it may be unduly restrictive in relation to re-use of units to the eastern end of the town centre, given that there is no predicted capacity for expansion in retailing. This may impact on the overall town centre vitality and viability, with potential impacts for local employment. High vacancy rates may also be detrimental to the quality of the built environment. If the provision of locally accessible facilities and services is compromised this would have knock on effects for community vibrancy. In addition, the need to travel may be increased with impacts for air quality and climate change. The option intersects with the WLHN to the north. Any new development would need to take account of this.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC85 (UDP EMS57) (Rejected)

0.33 South Elmsall Town Centre Inset Map

Primary Shopping Frontages (In accordance with policy S6)

− − − − The option is within a priority neighbourhood, with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option covers the existing primary shopping frontage as defined by the UDP, along Barnsley Road, which is the main shopping high street. These units still perform as a primary shopping frontage. However, it may be relevant to consider whether any expansion of the PSF might be relevant based on any changes to the types of businesses occupying high street units. This may strengthen support for town centre vitality and viability, in the priority neighbourhood. This would benefit local employment, community vibrancy and the quality of the built environment. Protecting the PSF would also help to retain facilities in a centrally accessible location to support a reduced need to travel. This would benefit air quality in the interests of health and climate change. The option intersects with the WLHN to the north. Any new development would need to take account of this.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


6.35 South Elmsall Town Centre


− − − − The option intersects with the Westfield Lane Improvement Special Policy Area (SPA11). The option also within a priority neighbourhood with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option covers the existing town centre boundary, but does not take account of changes to the fabric of the town centre that have occurred towards the eastern and western ends of the main high street. Failing to take account of these changes may be a missed opportunity to maximise town centre vitality and viability, which may be detrimental to community vibrancy, with associated impacts on environmental objectives such as a quality built environment, sustainable transport, air quality and climate change. Given that this is a priority neighbourhood, such opportunities should be taken. The option intersects with the WLHN to the north. Any new development would need to take account of this.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


7.83 South Elmsall Town Centre


√√ √√ √ √ The option is in SFRA flood zone 2 and 3a. The option is within a priority neighbourhood, with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option links with SPA11. This option takes account of the changes to the town centre, by excluding the properties to the eastern end of the centre, and including the proposed development site to the western end where a discount supermarket is anticipated. This option provides a better reflection of the current town centre, and incorporates the option to for further development that would help to retain a greater proportion of convenience and day to day top up shopping. This would provide multiple benefits in this priority neighbourhood such as local employment, local facilities and services and locally accessible food. In turn this supports town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy, quality built environment, reduced need to travel, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change. Any new development would need to take appropriate account of relevant flood risk. The option intersects with the WLHN to the north. Any new development would need to take account of this.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


4.43 South Elmsall Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ The option connects with SPA11. Part of the option is within SFRA zones 2 and 3a. The option is in a priority neighbourhood, with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option comprises a reduced retail policy area omitting the mixed use area to the east. With no amendments to the western end. This option would provide a better fit than the existing UDP boundary, in terms of the focus of town centre retailing. This would provide multiple benefits in this priority neighbourhood such as local employment, local facilities and services and locally accessible food. In turn this supports town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy, quality built environment, reduced need to travel, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change. Any new development would need to take appropriate account of relevant flood risk. The option intersects with the WLHN to the north. Any new development would need to take account of this.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC89 (GVA) (Accept)

0.41 South Elmsall Primary Shopping Frontage

√√ √√ √ √ The option encompasses the existing PSF, with extensions to the west along Barnsley Road, and a deletion to the east of the junction with Westfield Lane and Barnsley Road. This option provides a more accurate reflection of the current makeup of the high street and would provide flexibility with the reuse of units for alternative town centre uses, whilst protecting the integrity of the primary frontage. The option is within a priority neighbourhood with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option would support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities. This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


4.58 South Elmsall Retail Policy Area √√ √√ √√ √ The option omits the mixed use area to the east, and the former Netto, butchers and bakers to the western end of the centre. The option includes the builder's merchants and yard with a sales counter on the high street. This option provides a more accurate reflection of the current town centre retail area and would provide flexibility with the reuse of units for alternative town centre uses, whilst protecting the integrity of the central retailing area. The option is within a priority neighbourhood with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option would support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities. This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change. The option intersects with SFRA zones 2 and 3a, therefore, any new development would need to take account of this. The option intersects with the WLHN to the north. Any new development would need to take account of this.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC91 (WMDC) (Accepted) (New policy DEV8)

1.6 Exchange Street, South Elmsall


√√ √√ √ √ The option includes the former Netto supermarket, the library and fire station. Some of the facilities are to remain, but it is anticipated that a discount supermarket would move onto part of the site. This option would help to retain greater proportion of convenience and top up shopping within the centre. The option is within a priority neighbourhood with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option would support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities. This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change.


0.66 The Green, South Kirkby

Local Retail Centre √ √√ √ √ The option relates to an area of local shops in the residential area of South Kirkby. There is a TPO within the boundary, and the option is within an area of employment and health deprivation. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

of health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment. Any new development would have to take account of the TPO, through the application of normal development management policies.

Ossett

RTC93 (UDP OH26) (Rejected)

5.22 Ossett Retail Policy Area (retailing in accordance with S1 & S2)

√ √ √ √ The option relates to the existing retail policy area within Ossett Town Centre, but does not include the edge of centre Lidl Supermarket. The option is within the Ossett Conservation Area (CA) and includes the Grade 2 listed Town Hall. The Retail Study identifies a realistic capacity for a new mainstream foodstore within Ossett, therefore, it may be that there is not a sequentially preferable town centre site, in which case it may be relevant to consider amending the retail policy area to accommodate for this. However, in general the existing boundary provides a focus for town centre retailing in the interests of vitality and viability, local employment and the provision of accessible facilities and services. This would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, and sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.12 Ossett Primary Retail Frontage (S6)

− − − − The option is within the Ossett Conservation Area and encompasses a small central parade of shops on Wellgate. However, given the scale and distribution of retail provision within Ossett Town Centre, it is considered that expanding the PSF would benefit the sustainability of the town by protecting the central retail character and associated facilities and services. This would benefit town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, sustainable transport, health and wellbeing, and climate change and efficient use of resources.


5.22 Ossett Town Centre


? ? ? ? The option relates to the existing town centre boundary for Ossett, but does not include significant areas to the south and east of the centre that perform a town centre function, nor does it include the option on the football ground to accommodate a new supermarket. As such, retaining the existing boundary, would fail to protect other parts of the town that perform a town centre function, from redevelopment that may compromise the sustainability of the centre. This may impact on vitality and viability, community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, sustainable transport and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


11.03 Ossett Town Centre

Town Centre Inset Map Boundary

√√ √ √ √ The option is within the Ossett Conservation Area (CA) and includes the Grade 2 listed Town Hall. The option relates to the existing town centre and expands into the other areas to the east and the south that perform a town centre function, along with the development site to the north proposed for a new supermarket, and includes the existing edge of centre Lidl Supermarket to the west. This would protect these other central areas from redevelopment that may compromise the sustainability of the centre, and facilitate the expansion in the convenience shopping identified in the retail study. This would benefit town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, sustainable transport and climate change.


5.85 Ossett Retail Policy Area × × × × The option is within the Ossett Conservation Area (CA) and includes the Grade 2 listed Town Hall. The option proposes an expansion to the west to include the existing Lidl, but proposes a reduction to the north along with a small reduction to the east, and does not include the proposed supermarket development site to the north. This option does not reflect the extent of the existing retail function of the town centre, nor does it reflect the aspirations for a new mainstream supermarket to claw back current leakage of trade out of the centre.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Therefore this option does not reflect the best option to support town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, sustainable transport and climate change.


0.9 Ossett Primary Shopping Frontage

√ √ √ √ The option is within the Ossett Conservation Area (CA) adjacent to the Grade 2 listed Town Hall. This option proposes a significant expansion of the primary shopping frontage to cover retail premises along Market Place, Dale Street, Bank Street and Towngate / Town End, but omits the existing PSF along Wellgate. This option would improve the protection of shops that perform a primary shopping function, to support the integrity of the town centre shopping function in the interests of vitality and viability, community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, sustainable transport and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


4.7 Ossett Retail Policy Area √√ √√ √ √ The option represents a reduction to the exiting retail policy area to the north and the east along station road. This option would protect the integrity and character of the existing retailing areas, whilst enabling a more flexible approach to other main town centre uses at other properties within the town centre boundary, that are outside the proposed retail policy area. The existing Lidl and the proposed new supermarket development site would be on the edge of this policy area, enabling continued flexibility within these sites. This would support objectives of town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, sustainable transport and climate change.

RTC100 (WMDC) (Accepted PSF9)

0.42 Ossett Primary Shopping Frontage

√√ √√ √ √ The option is within the Ossett Conservation Area (CA) adjacent to the Grade 2 listed Town Hall. This option includes the existing Primary Shopping Frontage at Wellgate, and proposes an expansion along the frontages within the pedestrianized precincts along Bank Street, Market Place, Towngate and Town End where primary retail units are concentrated. This option will protect these primary retail units whilst enabling the flexible reuse of other town centre units for other main town centre uses. This would support objectives of town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy, health





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

and wellbeing, the quality of the built environment, sustainable transport and climate change.


1.77 Ossett Town Football Ground, Prospect Road, Ossett


√√ √ ? ? The option relates to the existing football ground within the urban area of Ossett, on the edge of the existing town centre boundary. The site is proposed to be redeveloped for a mainstream foodstore and taken into the town centre boundary. If the site is redeveloped alternative facilities should be secured as part of any planning application. Subject to this, the option would support objectives of health and wellbeing, community vibrancy and access to local leisure/recreation facilities. The retail study identifies that a mainstream foodstore could draw trade from the existing town centre Co-op supermarket. Whilst the spend would ultimately remain within the town centre, this may result in a large vacant property, in a prominent location within the town that could impact on the vibrancy of the town centre. Therefore, it may be relevant to consider whether an alternative use is likely to be secured for such a large unit in the event that the store is approved. The option should increase the availability of high quality fresh produce with associated health benefits. In terms of sustainable transport, the option would improve accessibility for local residents. However, care should be





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

taken to ensure mitigate the impacts of wider trade draw in terms of additional trips to the facility by the private car, which could impact on local air quality and climate change. This may also have knock on effects for local air quality.

Horbury


1.56 Horbury Town Centre

Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ The option includes a grade 2 listed building and is within the Horbury Conservation Area (CA12). The option relates to the existing retail policy area in Horbury, along High Street and Queen Street. Vacancy rates are low, and there is a mix of main town centre uses including convenience, comparison, food and drink, professional services and retail services. The majority of convenience spend relates to top-up shopping, and there is limited scope to increase the market share through a mainstream foodstore within Horbury itself. Rather the option has been directed to Ossett on the basis of a joint catchment. The town serves a localised day-to-day comparison goods need, and there is limited need for qualitative and quantitative improvements to provision. Therefore, the existing retail policy area would support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, continue to provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change.


1.56 Horbury Town centre Boundary

√ √ √ √ The option includes a grade 2 listed building and is within the Horbury Conservation Area (CA12). The option relates to the existing Town Centre Boundary. The option would continue to support the function of the town centre, which serves a localised day-to-day convenience and comparison goods needs, where there is limited need for qualitative and quantitative improvements to provision, but low vacancy rates. Therefore, this would continue to support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities. This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, continue to provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


2.04 Horbury Town Centre


√ √ √ √ The option includes the existing town centre, but incorporates the Peel Street car park, that performs a town centre function for shoppers and the Co-op supermarket. The option includes a grade 2 listed building and is within the Horbury Conservation Area (CA12). The option would continue to support the function of the town centre, which serves a localised day-to-day convenience and comparison goods needs, where there is limited need for qualitative and quantitative improvements to provision, but low vacancy rates. Therefore, this would continue to support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities. This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, continue to provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


1.63 Horbury Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ The option encompasses the existing Retail Policy Area with a small extension to the south to include a couple of properties on School Lane. The option includes a grade 2 listed building and is within the Horbury Conservation Area (CA12). The option would continue to support the retail function of the town centre, which serves a localised day-to-day convenience and comparison goods needs, where there is limited need for qualitative and quantitative improvements to provision, but low vacancy rates. Therefore, this would continue to support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities. This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, continue to provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.15 Horbury Primary Shopping Frontage

√ √ √ √ The town centre has low vacancy rates, and the units proposed to be included primarily relate to convenience and comparison units with interspersed food and drink, and retail services. The option would provide additional protection to the primary retail units along Queen Street and High Street. However, the option may limit flexibility of re-use of vacant units in the future, which may have an impact on vitality and viability in a different market. Nevertheless, the option would continue to support the retail function of the town centre, which serves a localised day-to-day convenience and comparison goods needs, where there is limited need for qualitative and quantitative improvements to provision, but low vacancy rates. Therefore, this would continue to support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities. This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, continue to provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


1.56 Horbury Retail Policy Area √ √ √ √ The option encompasses the existing Retail Policy Area, with some alterations at the boundary to provide a better fit with boundaries on the ground to reflect some changes since the UDP boundary was adopted. The option includes a grade 2 listed building and is within the Horbury Conservation Area (CA12). The option would continue to support the retail function of the town centre, which serves a localised day-to-day convenience and comparison goods needs, where there is limited need for qualitative and quantitative improvements to provision, but low vacancy rates. Therefore, this would continue to support the vitality and viability of the existing centre as it now functions, providing local employment opportunities. This in turn would support community vibrancy, the quality of the built environment, continue to provide locally accessible facilities and services, with benefits for sustainable transport, air quality and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Other

RTC108 (Rejected)

2.11 Carr Gate Garden Centre

Retail ? ? × × The site relates to an existing garden centre in the Green Belt, outside of the established settlement hierarchy. The site is in an AQMA. The site is accessible to 77% of the district's population within 60 minutes by public transport between 10am-4pm. This is an out of centre location and whilst the option may generate some additional localised employment opportunities, it would not support the vitality and viability of the nearest retail centre, which is Wakefield, and may have a detrimental impact on the centre. Furthermore, whilst the site is considered relatively accessible by public transport, it is likely that any intensification of development would attract further trips by private car, within the M1 AQMA, with associated impacts for air pollution, health and climate change.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


1.13 Wakefield Road, Fitzwilliam

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option relates to a parade of local shops along the main high street in Fitzwilliam. The option is adjacent to a housing allocation (HS82) and there is a TPO within the boundary. The option is within an area of income, employment and health deprivation. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment. Any new development would have to take account of the TPO, through the application of normal development management policies.





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)


0.8 Wakefield Road, Kinsley

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option relates to a parade of local shops along the main high street in Kinsley. The option is adjacent to an employment zone (EZ30). The option is within a priority neighbourhood, with associated income, employment and health deprivation. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment.


0.52 High Street, Ferrybridge

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ ? The option contains a TPO, and is within SFRA flood risk zone 3a. The site is within an AQMA and an area of employment deprivation. The option relates to a parade of local shops and would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment. Any new development would need to take account of flood risk, air quality and the TPO.


1.2 High Street, Upton

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option relates to a parade of local shops along the high street in Upton. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment.


0.45 Mill Lane, Ryhill

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option relates to an area of local shops and facilities in the centre of Ryhill. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of health and wellbeing. The option would also support





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment.


1.13 High Street, Crofton

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option relates to an area of local shops and facilities along Crofton High Street. There is a listed building and a TPO within the option. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment.


Ackworth Moor Top

Local Retail Centre √ √ √ √ The option relates to two areas of local shopping facilities within Ackworth Moor Top. There are TPOs and Buildings of Local Interest within these options, and the option is within an AQMA. The option would help to protect localised shopping facilities and services, and associated employment, accessible to the surrounding residential areas. This will help support the use of sustainable transport in the interests of air quality and climate change. The option will also help to support the provision of accessible food produce, in the interests of





Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

health and wellbeing. The option would also support community vibrancy and promote a quality built environment.



Final Sustainability Appraisal of New and Amended Site Options

Site/Area Reference Site/Area Name

Proposed Land Use

Sustainability Appraisal Site Commentary/Constraints

Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Wakefield

RTC170 (Reject)

Wrenthorpe Local retail Centre

-/? -/? -/? -/? This option may help to protect locally accessible facilities and services, with associated economic, community and environmental / transport benefits. However, at present there is no clear nucleus or vacant sites to support the inclusion of a defined geographic area to deliver this on the ground, as local facilities and services are spread out along the length of Wrenthorpe Lane and onto Wrenthorpe Road and Bradford Road.

RTC4 (Reject)

Asdale Road (west of Asda), Sandal (1.4 ha)

Expansion to Sandal District Centre (Accepted Option RTC7)

? √ √√ xx This is a greenfield site in the Green Belt, adjacent to the settlement boundary of the SRC of Wakefield in Sandal. The option would result in an extension to the existing retail area, which has been proposed as a District Centre in the Local Plan Submission. The site is in AQMA3. The option would increase local employment and training opportunities, and enhance the provision of local facilities and services. However, the scale of the additional development in this location may divert employment and investment opportunities from Wakefield City Centre. Therefore, any allocation should consider whether the potential impacts would justify restrictions to the scale of comparison goods trade. An increase in retail development of this scale would attract additional vehicular trips, with implications for local air quality, and climate change mitigation. Consideration should, therefore, be given to how sustainable transport requirements might be incorporated into any allocation.




Proposed Land Use


Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC5 (Reject) Land at Asdale Road (East of Asda), Sandal (2.22 ha)

Expansion to Sandal District Centre (Accepted option RTC7)

? √ √√ xx This is a greenfield site in the Green Belt, adjacent to the settlement boundary of the SRC of Wakefield in Sandal. The option would result in an extension to the existing retail area, which has been proposed as a District Centre in the Local Plan Submission. The majority of the site is within SFRA flood zones 2 and 3b. The site is within AQMA3. The option would increase local employment and training opportunities, and enhance the provision of local facilities and services. However, the scale of the additional development in this location may divert employment and investment opportunities from Wakefield City Centre. Therefore, any allocation should consider whether the potential impacts would justify restrictions to the scale of comparison goods trade. An increase in retail development of this scale would attract additional vehicular trips, with implications for local air quality, and climate change mitigation. Consideration should, therefore, be given to how sustainable transport requirements might be incorporated into any allocation. Any development would also need to take account of drainage and flooding implications, given the location of the site in flood zones.




Proposed Land Use


Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Pontefract

RTC164 WMDC (Accepted) (New Policy TS15)

Southgate / Friarwood Lane, Pontefract.

Local Road Network Scheme -

√ √ √ √ The option would provide capacity improvements at the junction. The option is in an area of health, income and employment deprivation. The option is adjacent to Housing allocation HS33 and partly within the Pontefract Castle Conservation Area CA3. The option is in an area of health, income and employment deprivation. Easing traffic congestion would improve the urban environment, and help improve local air quality. This would have knock on effects for health and climate change. Improved transport links may also have a small benefit to the local economy by improving the speed of traffic movements to and from local businesses. The details of the option would need to respect the historic environment.

RTC171 (Reject)

Stuart Road, Pontefract


√ √ √ √ The option would provide capacity improvements at the junction of Stuart Road and Front Street to ease congestion. The option is in an area of employment deprivation. The option is adjacent to SPA6 former Prince of Wales Colliery and TS8 South East Link Road. Easing traffic congestion would improve the urban environment, and help improve local air quality. This would have knock on effects for health and climate change. Improved transport links may also have a small benefit to the local economy by improving the speed of traffic movements to and from local businesses.




Proposed Land Use


Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

RTC172 (Reject)

Northgate/Back Northgate, Pontefract

Local Road Network Scheme (One-way System)

−/? −/? −/? −/? The option would create a one-way giratory system for Northgate and Back Northgate, which would require parking controls to one side of the roads only. The option is within the Pontefract Conservation Area, and adjacent to the Pontefract Castle SAM. The option is within an area of income, health and employment deprivation. Whilst the option may provide some traffic improvements, with associated improvements to local air quality, and knock on effects for health and climate change it would disrupt public transport services. This may have knock on effects for the local economy.

Castleford

RTC20 (Accept) (RTC15 now rejected) (New Policy RPA1)

Castleford Town Centre 5.51

Retail Policy Area (development in accordance with S1)

√√ √ √ √ This option represents a reduction in Retail Policy Area in Castleford at western end of Carlton Street towards the junction with Albion Street. This reduction was recommended as part of the Initial SA on RTC15 due to a concentration of vacant units in this part of town. Taking these units out of the Retail Policy Area will provide greater flexibility for sustainable reuse of the units, which will support the vitality and viability of the town centre. As such this will improve the positive sustainability impacts of the option. As with RTC15, the option covers the main shopping area within the town centre of Castleford. Supporting retail development in accordance with policy S1 will help to support the provision and retention of facilities and services in a central location, accessible by




Proposed Land Use


Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

sustainable modes of transport. The option is in AQMO12007, and in an area of flood risk. The option is affected by employment and health deprivation. The option will support town centre retailing and employment in the interest of viability and vitality and community vibrancy. Protecting centrally accessible facilities will have positive benefits for air quality, climate change and health. The option should also have positive benefits for the built environment. Any new development should take account of flood risk.

South Elmsall

RTC89 (Wakefield MDC) (Accepted) (New Policy PSF6)

South Elmsall 0.83

Primary Shopping Frontage

√ √ √ √ This option represents an increase in the Primary Shopping Frontage (PSF) proposed in the Consultation Draft, which in itself was an increase from the PSF in the UDP. The option represents the occupied retail units on the ground. Whilst it may help to protect local shopping facilities it would reduce the level of flexibility in the reuse of these units for non-retail town centre uses. The impact of this on the vitality and viability of the town centre may be dependent on the changing conditions of the retail market over the local plan period. This could have knock on effects for community vibrancy and the provision of local facilities and services, with associated impacts on the built environment, the need to travel, air quality and climate change.




Proposed Land Use


Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Featherstone

RTC174 (Reject)

Featherstone Town Centre


√ √ √ √ This option proposes to amend the boundary to include Lidl across the A645. The A645 is currently the town centre boundary, and provides a natural demarcation between the town centre and this edge of centre site. Nevertheless, the option links with SPA10 allocated for housing and B1 employment, and includes the main shopping high street of Featherstone, Station Lane. The option is within an AQMO, and an area of employment and health deprivation. The option would support centrally accessible local facilities, and services and employment. This will support the vitality and viability of the town centre. Retaining centrally accessible facilities and services will help reduce the need to travel, with associated benefits for air quality and climate change. The option would also help to supporting quality and character of the built environment.

RTC175 (Reject)

Featherstone Retail Policy Area

? ? ? ? This option proposes to amend the Retail Policy Area to include Lidl across the A645. Whilst this site is currently in retail use, it is deemed to be outside the town centre. Therefore, including it in the Retail Policy Area may restrict its future sustainable alternative reuse. This is significant as current evidence supports a reduction in the retail policy area for this reason. Any resultant vacant units may have a detrimental impact on the vitality and viability of the town centre. With knock on effects for community vibrancy, access to facilities and services, sustainable transport and climate change.




Proposed Land Use


Eco

no

mic

Soci

al

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Tra

nsp

ort

)

Envi

ron

me

nt

(Oth

er)

Horbury

RTC167 (rejected)

Horbury Bridge Local Retail Centre

-/? -/? -/? -/? This option may help to protect locally accessible facilities and services, with associated economic, community and environmental / transport benefits. However, at present there is no clear nucleus or vacant sites to support the inclusion of a defined geographic area to deliver this on the ground.



Appendix D: Schedule of Pre-Submission Amendments to Final SA Report

Ref. No.

Page No.

Paragraph/ Table

Modification Reason for Modification

1 25 Table 3 National

Add new row: The EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) 2000 The aim of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD) is long-term sustainable water management based on a high level of protection of the aquatic environment to achieve cleaner rivers and lakes, groundwater and coastal beaches. The environmental objectives of the WFD are:

to prevent deterioration of the status of surface waters and groundwater

to achieve objectives and standards for protected areas

to aim to achieve good status for all water bodies or, for heavily modified water bodies and artificial water bodies, good ecological potential and good surface water chemical status

to reverse any significant and sustained upward trends in pollutant concentrations in groundwater

the cessation of discharges, emissions and loses of priority hazardous substances into surface waters

progressively reduce the pollution of groundwater and prevent or limit the entry of pollutants

To provide clarity and to demonstrate that the Sustainability Appraisal process has taken account of the objectives of the EU WFD through the drafting of SA objectives and appraisals.

2 25 Regional / Sub-Regional

Add new row: Humber River Basin Management Plan (HRBMP) The Humber River Basin Management Plan fulfils the requirements of the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD). The purpose of the plan is to provide a framework for protecting and enhancing the benefits provided by the water environment, in the interests of protecting human health, water supply, natural ecosystems and biodiversity. Wakefield is part of the Aire and Calder Catchment Partnership. The partnership’s vision is for 'a healthy and wildlife-rich water environment that is valued and enjoyed,

To provide clarity and to demonstrate that the Sustainability Appraisal process has taken account of the objectives of the EU WFD through the drafting of SA objectives and appraisals.



bringing social and economic benefits to all.' The priority river basin management issues to tackle in this catchment are:

mitigation of the effects of heavily modified water bodies

point source pollution, primarily from water company assets

diffuse pollution, both urban and rural Other issues for the partnership include litter and invasive species.

3 42 Table 4 Water Resources

Add new paragraphs at end: Aire and Calder Catchment There are 79 river water bodies (of which 60 are designated as heavily modified) and 50 lake water bodies (of which 48 are designated as heavily modified) within the Aire and Calder river catchment. 14 per cent of rivers (87 km) currently achieve good or better ecological status/potential. 25 per cent of rivers assessed for biology are at good or better biological status now, 17 per cent at poor biological status, and 13 per cent at bad status. Discharges from water industry storm systems and sewage works are key reasons for failures in the catchment. Physical modifications due to water storage and supply, flood protection and urbanisation, along with diffuse pollution from agriculture and acidification also play a key role in determining the status of rivers and lakes in this catchment. Don and Rother Catchment There are 78 river water bodies and 18 lakes in the catchment. 78 are artificial or heavily modified. Nine per cent of rivers (48 km) currently achieve good or better ecological status/potential. 25 per cent of rivers assessed for biology are at good or better biological status now, with 38 per cent at poor biological status, and 13 per cent at bad status. Point source discharges from water industry sewage works and storm discharges are key reasons for failures in the catchment. Diffuse pollution from agriculture and physical modification due to urbanisation and water storage and supply also play a key role in determining the status of rivers and lakes in this catchment.

To provide clarity and to demonstrate that the Sustainability Appraisal process has taken account of the baseline information in the HRBMP through the drafting of SA objectives and appraisals.

4 45 Table 5 Amend sixth bullet point: For clarification.



A biodiverse and attractive natural environment (SA12)

Will it protect and enhance the region’s rivers and lake water bodies within the Humber River Basin?

5 46 Table 5 Prudent and efficient use of energy and natural resources with minimal production of waste (SA15)

Add bullet point:

Will it make efficient use of water resources?

For clarification.

6 49 Paragraph 7.9 Amend text in point 6: “Whether the proposal is located in a floodplain, an area of significant flood risk and whether it actively contributes to flood management and the management of water resources (SA11, SA14, SA15)”.

For clarification.

7 49 Paragraph 7.9 Amend text in point 8: “If the proposal is located within a locally, nationally, or internationally designated ecological area or would contribute to the management of water resources in the interests of ecological diversity (SA12)”.

For clarification.

8 49 Paragraph 7.9 Amend text in point 12: “Whether the proposal is within an air quality management area or would impact on land or water pollution”.

For clarification.



Appendix E: Examination Modifications to Final Sustainability Appraisal Report

Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph

Main Modification Reason for modification

Sustainability Appraisal Implications

RMIQ13 14 RTC116 Amend policy title: “Retail Development in Shopping Centres Town Centres” Amend policy text: “Retail development will be encouraged and permitted in the retail policy area of the town centres and within other centres, or sites allocated for retail use, as defined on the Policies Map. In other recognised centres retail development will be encouraged on a scale appropriate to the needs of the area served by these centres. Development will be subject to local planning, traffic and environmental considerations, viewed in the context of the needs of people who live in or near the areas affected. will provide customer choice and reflect the individuality of the centres.”

To align with National Planning Policy Framework.

Whilst this modification provides a better alignment with National Planning Policy Framework, and clarifies where retail development will be encouraged and permitted, it is not considered to alter the principle of the policy to direct appropriate retail development towards defined centres to cater for local needs having regard to local circumstances. Therefore, this modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMIQ13 14 3.1 Add additional sentence at end of paragraph: “Throughout this plan the term retail policy area should be considered as having the same meaning and definition as the term primary shopping area as laid out in the National Planning Policy Framework.”

For clarification and consistency with adopted local plans

Throughout the Plan the SA was carried out on the understanding that the term retail policy area had the same meaning as the term primary shopping area in the National Planning Policy Framework. Therefore, there are no significant implications for earlier conclusions of the SA as a result of this modification.

RMIQ14 14 RTC117 Amend policy title: “Retail Development on the Edge of Shopping Centres Retail Policy Areas” Amend first sentence: “Large retail outlets (foodstores and retail warehouses)


This modification is not considered to significantly alter the principles of the policy upon which SA has already been carried out. However, the amendment to part iii) of the policy increases the flexibility of the policy in relation to the



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



which cannot be accommodated within the defined retailing retail policy areas of centres as shown on the Policies Map will be permitted on the fringe edge of these areas provided that the development:” Amend “i) Lies within the existing urban area settlement boundary as defined on the Policies Map;” Amend iii) “Does not involve land allocated for other uses, unless there is no reasonable prospect of it being used for the allocated use, or the land is allocated for retail use.” Delete iv) “Is on a scale appropriate to the needs of the area served by the established shopping centre.” Amend last 2 sentences:

“Development will be subject to local planning, traffic and environmental considerations, and viewed in the context of the needs of people who live in or near the areas affected. The retail outlets should complement the provision within the established shopping centre.” will provide customer choice and reflect the individuality of the centres.”

reuse of land which will support regeneration, with associated social, economic and environmental benefits. The modification also clarifies that development sites allocated for retail purposes are suitable for retail development on the edge of the RPAs. However, overall the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.

RMIQ14 14 3.2 Add after final sentence:

“This policy should be read in conjunction with RTC Policy 173 in determining whether an impact assessment will be required.”

For clarification.

This modification is not considered to significantly alter the principles of the application of policy RTC173 upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



RMIQ15 15 RTC122 Amend policy title: “Non-retail Uses in Primary Shopping Frontages”

Amend policy:

“In primary shopping frontages as shown on the Policies Map shall be defined as Primary Shopping Frontages. non-retail uses will be permitted at ground floor level unless they would either:

i) create a continuous frontage of more than three non-retail uses (classes A3 - A5), or 20 metres of non-retail uses;

ii) result in more than 25% of the total length of street primary frontage in any one street or of any one block being in non-retail use.”


This modification is not considered to significantly alter the principles of the policy upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.

RMIQ15 15 3.4 Amend “Policy RTC122 aims to ensure that changes of use within the primary shopping frontages of town centres take place without undermining their shopping function.”

For clarification and to align with National Planning Policy Framework.


RMIQ16 15 3.6 Amend paragraph 3.6:

“Wakefield Council and its partners in Wakefield Together are committed to improving the health of the district's residents. There is no single solution to this issue as there are many contributory factors. However, the planning process can influence choices over food/diet. Wakefield District has one of the highest density of fast

For clarification




Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



food outlets per 100,000 population within the country. In addition the vast majority of hot food takeaways (74%) are located outside existing centres. Evidence shows that school children in the district are consuming too many takeaway meals. Children of all ages who eat more than two takeaways a week are also less likely to eat fruit and vegetables frequently and more likely to drink fizzy beverages, eat crisps and sweets. A significant proportion of school children (55% of primary school pupils and 40% of secondary school pupils) walk or cycle to school in the district. On these journeys there is by restricting hot food take-aways in the vicinity of schools, there by reducing the temptation to purchase this type of food on the way to/from school and at lunch times. A buffer zone of 400 metres has been applied to the policy in relation to schools. This is recognised as the equivalent of around a 10 minute walk which the Council considers will assist in reducing school children’s access to fast food outlets. Consequently this policy will aid the Council in meeting its objective to reduce detrimental health impacts.”

RMIQ18 18 RTC173 Amend policy: An impact assessment will be required for retail, leisure and office proposals which are outside of a centre, as identified on the Policies Map, and not in accordance with the Local Plan. The following minimum gross external floorspace thresholds will apply:

1. For the Sub-regional City, Principal Towns and Main

For clarification –RTCSUB36.

This modification provides clarification that the relevant floorspace threshold is gross external rather than internal. This strengthens the ability of the policy to ensure out of centre retail development does not have a detrimental impact on existing identified centres. Whilst this may be interpreted as reducing the flexibility for some types of retailers that



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



Towns - 700square metres.

2. For the District Centres and Local Retail Centres - 300square metres.

prefer out of centre locations, in general this will have an overall positive impact for town centre vitality and viability with other associated social, environmental and economic benefits. As such the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.

RMIQ18 18 After 3.12 Add new paragraphs:

“It is not considered retail development less than 700m2 has an adverse impact on these categories of town centre in the district. 700m2 has been used by the Council as a benchmark for determining what is considered a large retail outlet in its edge of centre development plan policy and a minimum unit size for sub-dividing larger units in edge of centre retail development. It has been used in conditions attached to planning permissions for edge of centre retail warehouse parks in Wakefield, Castleford and Pontefract.

The threshold of 300m2 is intended to exclude the need for assessments for small shops, leisure and office development, but to require assessments for mini-market food stores and similar sized non-food stores, leisure and office development. 300m2 relates closely to the floorspace limit applied for Sunday trading purposes, as well as the Council’s view about what constitutes a local shop. The Council’s Local Shops policy encourages and permits local shopping facilities to meet day-to-day needs of the immediate locality, subject to local planning,

For clarification

This modification clarifies the logic behind the proposed thresholds, but is not considered to significantly alter the principles of the application of policy RTC173, upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



traffic and environmental considerations. There is no restriction in relation to proximity to defined centres. Consequently, it is not appropriate to include a threshold below 300m2. Above 300m2 the Council considers the development would not be a local shop and should be located in a centre. The sequential approach would apply and the impact on nearby district and local centres should be assessed given the relatively small size of the centres.”

RMIQ19 18 After 3.13 Add new paragraph:

“300m2 relates closely to the floorspace limit applied for Sunday trading purposes, as well as the Council’s view about what constitutes a local shop. Above 300m2 the Council considers the development would not be a local shop and should be located in a centre. The sequential approach would apply and the impact on nearby district and local centres should be assessed given the relatively small size of the centres. A similar threshold should apply to define other small scale rural development, based on the size of rural development approved around the district outside of centres, which is typically between 200 – 300m2.”

For clarification

This modification clarifies the logic behind the proposed thresholds, but is not considered to significantly alter the principles of the application of policy RTC176, upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.

RMIQ21c RMIQ27b RMM1 RMIQ32a RMM2 RMM3 RMM4 RMM5

21 26 32 34 35 37 39 40

RTC 20 RTC 66 RTC 32 RTC 40 RTC 72 RTC 90 RTC 81 RTC 107

Amend 2nd sentence “Beyond this area there will be a presumption against retailing unless it can be proven that the proposed development could not be accommodated within the designated Retail Policy Area retailing will generally only be permitted where it can be proven there are no suitable sequentially preferable sites available.”

For clarification - RTCSUB41 & RTCSUB33.

This modification relates to the retail policy areas across the district as identified on the Policies Map. This modification clarifies and strengthens the original intention of the policies to ensure retail development is directed towards the town centres first within the district, in accordance with National Planning



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



RMIQ37a 41 RTC 99 Policy. This approach has already been identified through earlier SA assessment as resulting in social, economic and environmental benefits associated with supporting town centre vitality and viability. Therefore, the proposed modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.

RMM6 RMM7 RMM8 RMM9 RMM10 RMM11 RMM12

22 28 34 36 37 39 41

Heading to paragraph: 4.14 4.29 5.11 5.16 5.23 5.28 5.37

Amend heading:

Possible Development Site(s)

Amend 1st Sentence:

“Possible Development Sites are areas of land that are considered to have potential for redevelopment.”

For clarification

This modification clarifies that the purpose of the allocations is for development relating to the respective uses as set out in the associated policies. However, the sustainability of the sites has already been assessed on the understanding that this is the case. Therefore, the proposed modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.

RMM13 22 4.14 Add after 1st sentence:

“The following sites are allocated as Development Sites and are identified on the Castleford inset map.”

For clarification

This additional text is for clarification, and does not alter the location of the Development Sites (RTC22, RTC23, RTC24 and RTC115) or the principles of the application of these policies, upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMIQ21b 22 RTC22 Add new sentence at start of policy: “This site should be developed primarily for retail use and may contain other main town centre uses and health care

For clarification and to ensure

The sustainability impacts of this allocation have previously been assessed in relation to the development of the site



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



provision.”

Amend 1st paragraph of the policy:

“This site is located adjacent to Aire Street and to the rear of properties on the northern side of Carlton Street. It is currently used primarily for car parking. Planning permission has been granted for a large format foodstore, and was renewed in 2012, but has not been implemented. The site remains suitable for development whether it be the approved scheme or some variation. It is well located for retail use and the town centre would benefit from a central foodstore. The site could also accommodate other town centre uses that would be complementary to the existing offer. Development proposals would need to include details of how links to the waterfront would be maintained and enhanced and how the development would relate to proposals for improving Castleford Waterfront (RTC24). In particular, the development would need to contribute to the Aire Street highway improvements including crossing points and improving the public realm. Any scheme would need to assess the need for replacement parking provision and its delivery. A transport assessment will be required to assess the impact on the local and strategic road networks, in particular M62 motorway Junction 32.”

consistency with Core Strategy policy CS2.

for retail use in addition to other of main town centre uses. This inclusion of health care provision within the range of possible uses increases the flexibility of the allocation to contribute to the regeneration of the Main Town and creating links with the special policy area. There would also be an increase in the opportunities to use sustainable modes of transport by locating healthcare facilities in a central location, with associated benefits for environmental sustainability. However, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions in the earlier SA assessment.

RMIQ21b 22 RTC23 Add new sentence at start of policy: “This site should be developed primarily for retail use and may contain other main town centre uses.”


For clarification

This modification is proposed for clarification purposes. The sustainability impacts of the allocation have already been assessed in relation to the site being developed for retail and town centre uses.



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



“This site is located at the eastern end of Carlton Street/Carlton Lanes and is currently used for car parking. Planning permission was granted for retail in but has not been implemented. The site is well located for retail use as it would form an extension to Carlton Street and the Carlton Lanes shopping centre. Alternatively, it could accommodate other town centre uses that would be complementary to the existing offer. This is a prominent site in a gateway location, consequently development should incorporate high quality, innovative design”

Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions in the earlier SA assessment.

RMIQ22 23 RTC24 Add new sentence at start of policy: “This site should be developed for a range of main town centre uses which could include leisure, office, residential use and retail development. It may also contain residential development.”

Delete 1st sentence of 2nd paragraph of the policy:

“The area is suitable for a range of town centre uses including leisure, offices, small scale retail and residential. Development proposals will need to have regard to the area's location alongside the river and maximise opportunities to provide public access to the waterfront. Development proposals would also need to include details of how the area relates to the rest of the town centre, in particular RTC22. The development would need to accommodate and contribute to works to Aire Street including a cycle route, crossing points and improving the public realm.”

For clarification

This modification is proposed for clarification purposes. The sustainability impacts of the allocation have already been assessed in relation to the site being developed for these proposed uses. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions in the earlier SA assessment.

RMIQ22 24 RTC115 Add new sentence at start of policy “This site should be developed for a range of main town

For clarification

This modification is proposed for clarification purposes. The sustainability



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



centre uses which could include leisure, office, retail, health care and service uses.”

Amend 3rd sentence of policy:

“This site is located between the town centre's retail area and the bus station, which has been redeveloped. It includes shops to the Albion Street/Carlton Street frontages and health and community facilities. The redevelopment of this site provides the opportunity to create improved pedestrian links between the bus station, train station and Carlton Street. Proposals will be considered on their merits and the site is suitable for a range of town centre uses including office, leisure, health, retail and service uses. Car parking provision should be retained and enhanced for users of the train station and other facilities. The council will adopt a flexible approach towards proposals and they do not need to involve clearance of the entire site. A desk-based archaeological assessment will need to be carried out before the determination of any planning application.”

impacts of the allocation have already been assessed in relation to the site being developed for these proposed uses. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions in the earlier SA assessment.

RMIQ23 24 4.15 Amend second sentence:

“The following route within Castleford Town Centre is to be designated as an Enhanced Pedestrian Route and is identified on the Castleford inset map.”

For clarification

This modification is not considered to significantly alter the principles of the application of policy RTC151 upon which SA has already been carried out, and does not alter the route of the enhanced pedestrian link. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment.



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



RMM14 26 4.25 Add final sentence to paragraph 4.25:

“Southgate is an important road in the town centre and carries substantial traffic. However, many of the adjoining properties do not face onto Southgate and there is no clear relationship between the road and these properties and indeed the rest of the town centre. Southgate has assumed the role of an inner relief road with its primary function being to transport traffic past the town centre as quickly as possible. Consequently there has been deterioration in the quality of the physical environment in the road corridor from Town End to Walkergate. As a result the Council wishes to designate Design Improvement Areas to positively enhance the environment within Southgate.”

For clarification

This modification is for clarification and is not considered to alter the principles behind the designation of the design improvement areas. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessment relating to those policies (RTC60, RTC61, RTC62 and RTC63).

RMM15 26 New Design Improvement Areas Policy after modification above

Delete paragraph 4.26:

Development within the Design Improvement Area will need to make a positive contribution/improvement to the Area by:

buildings being constructed up to the back of footways, avoiding large areas of car parking or outdoor storage

between the road/footway and buildings;

frontages to Southgate generally being active at ground level.

Delete paragraph 4.27:

Works in and adjacent to the highway will be designed/implemented in a manner that improves the

For clarification

As this modification has resulted in the creation of a new policy, which has not previously been subject to Sustainability Appraisal a full Sustainability Appraisal is included in the following section of the report.



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



general environment of the road corridor by:

the use of appropriate materials particularly for footways and other areas of the public realm;

the planting of trees and other vegetation.

construction of new, and improvements to, existing walls and entrances.

Add new policy:

Design Improvement Areas

Development within the Design Improvement Areas, as identified on the Pontefract inset map, will need to make a positive contribution and improvement to the area by:

ensuring buildings are constructed up to the back of footways, avoiding large areas of car parking or outdoor storage between the road/footway and buildings;

frontages to Southgate generally being active at ground level.

Works in and adjacent to the highway will need to be designed and implemented in a manner that improves the general environment of the road corridor by:

the use of appropriate materials, particularly for footways and other areas of the public realm;

the planting of trees and other vegetation.

construction of new, and improvements to existing, walls and entrances.



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



All the designated Design Improvement Areas are in locations with high archaeological potential. Significant development proposals in these areas should be accompanied by an archaeological desk based assessment.

RMM16 26 4.28 Amend sentence: “The following sections of Southgate are designated Design Improvement Areas and are identified on the Pontefract inset map:”

For clarification

The design improvement areas have already been assessed in relation to their location as identified on the Policies Map. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of this earlier SA assessment.

RMM17 RMM18 RMM19 RMM20

26 - 27

RTC60 RTC61 RTC62 RTC63

Delete text under policy name: “This area is of high archaeological potential and significant development proposals should be accompanied by an archaeological desk-based assessment”

For clarification. This information is now incorporated into the new policy RTC 167 Design Improvement Areas.

This amendment relates to the fact that design improvement areas are of high archaeological potential and requires significant development proposals to be accompanied by an archaeological desk-based assessment. This text has been incorporated into the new Design Improvement Areas policy, to be applied in conjunction with the individual Design Improvement Areas as identified on the policies map. Therefore, the requirement for an archaeological desk-based assessment will remain effective as originally intended in these locations. As such, it is considered the modification does not significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMM21 27 Additional supporting text at start

Add new sentence under section heading:

“Special Policy Areas allow mixed use development.

For clarification

This additional text is for clarification and is not considered to alter the principles of the application of RTC54 upon which SA



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



of Special Policy Area section

Further information about these allocations can be found in Section 9 of the Site Specific Policies Local Plan.”

has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMM22 27 Additional supporting text at start of Special Policy Area section

Add 2nd sentence:

“The following site is allocated as a Special Policy Area and is identified on the Pontefract inset map.”

For clarification

This additional text is for clarification, and does not alter the location of the Special Policy Area RTC54 upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMM23 27 RTC54 Add new sentence at start of policy “This site should be developed for office, leisure and employment uses.”

Amend 2nd paragraph of the policy:

“This Special Policy Area, to the south of Stuart Road, currently encompasses a former nightclub and a car park/storage area for the adjacent Haribo factory. The Kiko’s nightclub site on Front Street is a low quality two storey dark brick building which provides an opportunity to secure an alternative use which will better contribute to the objectives of the design vision of the Tanshelf Study providing an opportunity to ensure high quality design on this gateway site. This site is located opposite the Fire Station site, close to Park Road and is therefore highly visible from both vehicles and pedestrians upon approach from the north. This should be considered as another key gateway site and it is imperative, therefore that any new building on this site should be appropriate

For clarification




Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



to this key location and its surrounding context (again, with particular reference to the former Queens Hotel building on the opposite side of Park Road and any new development on the fire station site). A building of three storeys would be appropriate on this site. The remainder of the Special Policy Area is suitable for redevelopment for commercial uses including offices and leisure. An important factor here is the quality of the general environment that is achieved taking into consideration the area's location at a main entrance to the town centre. The area would benefit from improvements to boundary treatment, landscaping and surfacing. A transport assessment will be required to assess the impact on the local and strategic road networks, in particular M62 motorway Junction 32. The incorporation of high quality public realm treatments has been identified as vital in ensuring that a legible and safe pedestrian environment is created throughout the Tanshelf area. The pedestrian route along Colonel's Walk will continue along Sessions Yard with enhancements to the public realm.”


“The following site is allocated as a Development Site and is identified on the Pontefract inset map.”

For clarification

This additional text is for clarification, and does not alter the location of Development Site RTC53 or the principles of the application of the policy, upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMIQ28 28 4.30 Amend second sentence: For clarification

This additional text is for clarification, and does not alter the location of the Enhanced Pedestrian Routes (RTC152,



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



Amend second sentence:

“The following a number of routes within Pontefract Town Centre are to be designated as Enhanced Pedestrian Routes and identified on the Pontefract inset map.”

RTC153 and RTC140) or the principles of the application of these policies, upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMM25 28 RTC53 Add new sentence at start of policy “This site should be developed as a discount foodstore or for leisure use.

Delete 4th sentence of the policy:

“A review of leisure provision across the district has been carried out and the existing pool on Stuart Road may close and a new pool be provided in Pontefract Park. Whilst the Retail Study concluded that there is no need to plan for new convenience provision in Pontefract over the emerging plan period given that existing stores, primarily the edge-of-centre Morrison’s, are found to be under-trading despite inflows from surrounding catchments which are to be reversed, the site of the existing pool is suitable for a discount foodstore. There is currently no such provision in or on the edge of the town centre. The site would also be suitable for leisure and other specialist uses. Development would be expected to contribute to the enhancement of the pedestrian route from Colonel's Walk to King Charles II house. A transport assessment will be required to assess the impact on the local and strategic road networks, in particular M62 motorway Junction 32.”

For clarification




Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



RMIQ28 33 Additional supporting text at start of Enhanced Pedestrian Route section

Add new sentence:

“The following route within Normanton Town Centre is designated as an Enhanced Pedestrian Route and is identified on the Normanton inset map.”

For clarification and consistency.

This additional text is for clarification, and does not alter the location of the Enhanced Pedestrian Route (RTC156) or the principles of the application of this policy, upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.


“The following site is allocated as a Development Site and is identified on the Featherstone inset map.”

For clarification

This additional text is for clarification, and does not alter the location of the Development Site (RTC157) or the principles of the application of this policy, upon which SA has already been carried out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMM27 34 RTC157 Add new sentence at start of policy: “This site should be developed for retail or other main town centre uses.”


“This site is located to the rear of the The Precinct on the western side of Station Lane. It was previously occupied by a Kwik Save supermarket which has now been demolished. Planning permission was granted in 2009, and renewed in 2012, for one A1 retail store and car parking. Development has not yet commenced, probably influenced by the grant of planning permission for a foodstore on the Crystal Drinks site as mentioned in 5.7. The site is well located for development for town centre

For clarification




Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



uses including retail and to provide links through to SPA10 (Special Policy Area – Land at Lister Close) allocated in the Site Specific Policies Local Plan.”

RMIQ33 36 5.16 Add after 1st sentence:

“The following site is allocated as a Development Site and is identified on the Knottingley inset map.”

For clarification.


RMIQ33 36 RTC160 Add new sentence at start of policy:

“This site should be developed as a foodstore.”

Delete final sentence of 1st paragraph of the policy:

“This is previously developed land within the settlement of Knottingley, which is classified as an urban area. It lies within the Knottingley town centre inset map boundary and as such will be covered by the relevant policy statements for that area. Planning permission has been granted for a Lidl foodstore. In the event that the planning permission is not implemented the Local Plan will identify that the site is suitable for a supermarket or other town centre uses.”

For clarification

This modification is proposed for clarification purposes. The sustainability impacts of the allocation have already been assessed in relation to the site being developed for this proposed uses. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions in the earlier SA assessment.


“The following site is allocated as a Development Site and is identified on the South Elmsall inset map.”

For clarification

This additional text is for clarification, and does not alter the location of the Development Site (RTC91) or the principles of the application of this policy, upon which SA has already been carried



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMIQ34 37 RTC91 Add new sentence at start of policy: “This site should be developed as a discount foodstore. Additional small scale retail units (no larger than 300 square metres each) would also be acceptable along with other main town centre uses.”

Delete 2nd sentence of the 1st paragraph of the policy:

“This site is located at the western end of the retail area in South Elmsall and is occupied by the Fire Station, the library, a health centre (now closed), a pay and display car park and a building previously used as a small supermarket. The site is suitable for retail and other commercial uses. It could accommodate the discount foodstore identified in the Retail Study and other small retail units, no larger than 300sqm each. Any scheme would need to address the issue of car parking. The site currently includes a pay and display car park and it is important to retain car parking provision to serve visits to the town centre as well as to businesses located on the site itself. Development proposals do not necessarily need to relate to the entire site, for example the library is unlikely to be available for development.”

For clarification

This modification is proposed for clarification purposes. The policy already identifies the site as being suitable for retail and other commercial uses, including a discount foodstore and other small retail units, and has been assessed as such through the earlier SA assessment. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions in the SA assessment work.


“The following site is allocated as a Development Site and is identified on the Hemsworth inset map.”

For clarification

This additional text is for clarification, and does not alter the location of the Development Site (RTC159) or the principles of the application of this policy, upon which SA has already been carried



Ref No Page No

Policy/ Paragraph



out. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of the earlier SA assessments.

RMIQ35 39 RTC159 Add new sentence at start of policy: “This site should be developed for main town centre uses. Residential development would also be acceptable.”

Delete second sentence of the policy: “It is suitable for a range of uses including residential.”

For clarification

This modification is proposed for clarification purposes. The sustainability impacts of the development of this site for residential, retail and town centre uses has already been assessed through earlier SA assessment. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of this earlier assessment.


“The following site is allocated as a Development Site and is identified on the Ossett inset map.”


RMIQ37b 41 RTC101 Add new sentence at start of policy: “This site should be developed as a foodstore.”

For clarification

This modification is proposed for clarification purposes. The sustainability impacts of the development of this site, with a foodstore, has already been assessed. Therefore, the modification is not considered to significantly alter the conclusions of this earlier SA assessment.



New Policy: Design Improvement Areas

(New Policy DIA1)

Examination Main Modification: Design Improvement Areas - Accepted

SA Reference

SA Objectives Effects Commentary / Explanation (including secondary, cumulative and synergistic effects)

Sho

rt T

erm

Me

diu

m T

erm

Lon

g T

erm

Pe

rman

ence

Like

liho

od

of

eff

ect

Ge

ogr

aph

ical

eff

ect

Economic


√ √ √ P M L Improving local design quality, within priority areas of the historic town of Pontefract, may help make the town a more attractive place to invest and carry out business, with associated new employment opportunities.


√ √ √ P M L Delivering good design does not necessarily result in higher development costs and improving local design quality within priority areas of the historic town of Pontefract may help make the town a more attractive place to invest and carry out business.

Social


√ √ √ P M L On-the-job training opportunities as a result of new investment and businesses may become available.




− − − P M L


√ √ √ P M L Design improvements that support town centre vibrancy are likely to support town centre safety and security.


√ √ √ P M L Improving local design quality and attracting new businesses will support town centre regeneration with knock on effects for community vibrancy.


√ √ √ P M L Encouraging local business investment may result in enhanced leisure and cultural opportunities in the town.


√ √ √ P M L The policy would support the provision of quality local facilities and services.


− − − P M L Some new housing could be delivered within the design improvement areas. However, this is unlikely to be of a significant scale.

Environmental

SA10 To provide a transport network which maximises access whilst minimising

_ _ _ P M L The policy supports the provision on new local facilities and services, which may have some indirect effects on reducing the need to travel outside of the town to access such provision. In turn this would provide increased opportunities for greater use of public transport.



detrimental impacts


√√

√√

√√

P M L The purpose of this policy is to improve the local quality of the built environment, whilst protecting and enhancing the significant historic assets of Pontefract. Improving the design quality in these locations represents efficient use of previously developed sites. And by making the town a more attractive place to live, work and invest the policy may also have knock on effects for reducing the need to travel


− − − P M L


_ _ _ P M L Reducing the need to travel to access facilities and services may have a knock on effect in terms of the use of sustainable transport and associated levels of transport related pollution.


_ _ _ P M D Reducing the need to travel to access facilities and services may have a knock on effect in terms of the use of sustainable transport and associated levels of transport related pollution.




√ √ √ P M D Improving the design quality within existing previously developed sites represents an efficient use of land and resources within these central locations.


Supporting design improvements within the historic town of Pontefract should help improve the quality of the built historic environment along one of the main vehicular route through the town. This will help to improve the image of the town with associated benefits of attracting investment and businesses. This would benefit town centre vitality and viability, community vibrancy and have potential benefits for tourism and the local economy. This also represents an efficient use of land. Making the town centre a more attractive place to live, work and invest may also have some knock on effects for sustainable transport and climate change by reducing the need to travel.

Key to Abbreviations

Overall Compatibility and Magnitude of Effect

Likelihood of effect Geographical Scale of Effect Permanence of Effect

Definition of Timescales

√√ : Very Sustainable H : High G : Global T : Temporary Short Term : 0-10 years

√ : Sustainable M : Medium N : National P : Permanent Medium Term : 10-20 years

- : Neutral L : Low R : Regional Long Term : After the life of the plan

? : Uncertain SR : Sub Regional

× : Unsustainable D : District Wide

×× : Very unsustainable L : Localised to settlement or area

Date post:	01-Oct-2020
Category:	Documents
Upload:	others
View:	0 times
Download:	0 times

Retail and Town Centre Local Plan - wakefield.gov.uk documents/RTC Adopted SA Report App… ·...

Documents