Local Plan Submission 2016 Housing Background Paper 1.0 ... · 2/3/2017 · Local Plan Housing Background Paper version 2 March 2017 Text shaded grey indicates main changes including

Local Plan Housing Background Paper version 2 March 2017

Text shaded grey indicates main changes including new/ replacement text from version 1 of the Housing Background Paper

Local Plan Submission 2016 Housing Background Paper 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Barnsley’s Local Plan

The Local Plan is a key strategic document that will set the planning framework for the future development of Barnsley. It sets out the planning strategy for the borough, policies that will be applied to development proposals and proposes site allocations.

1.2 This background paper supports submission of the Local Plan. The Local Plan

Publication version was out to consultation for a period of eight weeks from 24th June to 19th August 2016. It provides more detail and explanation about how we have arrived at our approach to housing, and the assumptions, information and calculations we have used that underpin that approach. The Publication version of the Local Plan and supporting documents and the representations can be found on the examination library page of the website using this link https://www.barnsley.gov.uk/services/planning-and-buildings/local-planning-and-development/our-new-local-plan/local-plan-examination-2016-17/local-plan-examination-library/ :-

Local Plan Publication version document SD2

Sustainability Appraisal SD4

Statement of Representations summarising the comments made SD8

Representations SD1, SD10 & SD11

1.3 The time period that the draft Local Plan intends to cover is 2014 to 2033. This is a nineteen year period and will be referred to as the ‘plan period’.

2.0 Barnsley’s Housing Strategy and its Objectives

2.1 In May 2014 Barnsley MBC agreed a Housing Strategy for 2014-2033. This builds on

housing and regeneration initiatives that have been delivered across the borough. It also builds on the progress that Barnsley has made over a number of years towards achieving the long-term goal for the borough as ‘a successful, uniquely distinctive town that offers prosperity and a high quality of life for all’.

2.2 It sets out the council’s ambitions for housing provision, investment and management in

the borough over the next 20 years, and how a series of four-year delivery plans will be developed. The delivery plans will also show how the Council will use resources and influence partners particularly the private sector, to achieve its goals.

2.3 The Housing Strategy sets out five main strategic objectives, what the delivery plans

will do to achieve these objectives and key ambitions. The objectives are set out below.

Objective 1 Support new housing development. Objective 2 Build high quality, desirable and sustainable homes. Objective 3 Make best use of and improve existing housing stock. Objective 4 Develop strong and resilient communities. Objective 5 Support younger, older and vulnerable people to live independently.

https://www.barnsley.gov.uk/services/planning-and-buildings/local-planning-and-development/our-new-local-plan/local-plan-examination-2016-17/local-plan-examination-library/





3.0 Housing Market Area and Duty to co-operate 3.1 In terms of migration Barnsley is a self-contained housing market area. It is

acknowledged that in respect of travel to work Barnsley is within part of a wider functional market area.

3.2 Work has been carried out previously within Leeds City Region that suggested Barnsley

shared a housing market with Wakefield and Kirklees. A recent update of this work suggests the border with Wakefield is less ‘permeable’. This work has yet to be finalised.

3.3 In Sheffield City Region Barnsley acknowledges that there may be some relationship

with Rotherham and Sheffield. 3.4 The SHMA update 2014 and the SHMA addendum 2017 considers the housing market

issue. The following text below is an extract from the SHMA addendum 2017:-

3.5 NPPG (para 8) states that housing needs should be assessed in relation to the relevant functional area, i.e. Housing Market Area, and this may identify smaller sub-markets with specific features and it may be appropriate to investigate these specifically in order to create a detailed picture of local need. It is also important to recognise that there are 'market segments' i.e. not all housing types have the same appeal to different occupants.

3.6 NPPG defines a Housing Market Area as “a geographical area defined by household demand and preferences for all types of housing, reflecting the key functional linkages between places where people live and work. It might be the case that housing market areas overlap”.1

3.7 NPPG comments that Housing Market Areas can be broadly defined by using three different sources of information as follows:

House prices and rates of change in house prices;

Household migration and search patterns;

Contextual data (for example travel to work area boundaries, retail and school catchment areas).

3.8 Former CLG guidance2 suggested that a housing market is self-contained if upwards of 70% of moves (migration and travel to work) take place within a defined area. However the guidance cautions that:

HMAs are inherently difficult to define. They are a geographic representation of people’s choices and preferences on the location of their home, accounting for live and work patterns. They can be defined at varying geographical scales from the national scale to sub-regional scale, down to local and settlement specific scales.

HMAs are not definitive. As well as a spatial hierarchy of different markets and sub-markets, they will inevitably overlap.

3.9 Barnsley Metropolitan Borough is located in South Yorkshire and is part of the Yorkshire and Humber region. The resident population of the Barnsley MB is 239,3193. The M1 motorway runs north-south through the Borough. Most of the population live to the east of the M1 in a predominantly urban and industrial area of dispersed former

1 National Planning Practice Guidance paragraph 10

2 DCLG Identifying Sub-Regional Housing Market Areas Advice Note, 2007

3 ONS 2015 mid-year population estimate



coalfield communities around the main urban area of Barnsley. To the west of the M1 are extensive rural areas bordering the Peak District National Park. Around 77% of the Borough is greenbelt land.

3.10 According to the 2011 census there were a total of 104,975 dwellings in Barnsley MB and 100,734 households. Overall, 64.8% of occupied dwellings are owner-occupied, 13.2% are private rented and 22.0% are affordable (social/affordable rented and intermediate tenure).

3.11 Figure 2.1 shows how median house prices across Barnsley MB have increased by 181% over the period 1996 to 2015, with median prices peaking at £114,000 during 2007 and following a reduction to £102,000 in 2010, there was a steady increase with prices reaching £115,000 in 2014; however, prices have subsequently reduced to £108,000 in 2015. Figure 2.1 also shows lower quartile price trends which have not exceeded £80,000 since 2008 following a peak of around £85,000. Both median and lower quartile prices have been lower than those of the region and England and in 2015, median prices were 77.1% of regional prices and 54% of national prices.

Migration and self containment

3.12 The 2014 SHMA considered the proportion of moves within Barnsley MB based upon the 2012 Household Survey. This evidenced that 76.1% of moving households originated in Barnsley MB and therefore concluded that the area was a self-contained Housing Market Area in terms of migration. Regarding travel to work, the household survey found that 55.6% of household reference people worked in Barnsley MB and analysis of Census data indicated that Barnsley MB is part of a wider functional economic area.

3.13 Table 2.1 considers approaches to considering migration and self-containment set out in PAS guidance which recommends that for self-containment, at least 70% of all migration excluding long-distance migration should be contained within the HMA. Data reported in the 2011 Census provides evidence from which the degree of self-containment of Barnsley MB can be derived. A suitable test are two migration containment ratios:

Supply Side (origin): moves within the area divided by all moves whose origin is in the area, excluding long-distance moves;

Demand site (destination): moves within the area divided by all moves whose destination is in the area, excluding long-distance migration.

3.14 Table 2.1 presents relevant data for Barnsley MB and Table 2.2 summaries the self-containment ratios derived from the data. Supply side (origin) flows consider moves within the district and moves to outside the district: 74.1% of moves were within Barnsley MB. Demand side (destination) flows consider moves within the district and moves from elsewhere into the Barnsley MB area (in-migration: 74.3% of all moves were within Barnsley MB.

3.15 Table 2.2 summarises the containment ratios which apply to the origin and destination of moving residents. In line with PPG guidance, this excludes long-distance migration (which is taken as moves from outside Yorkshire and the Humber). The origin self-containment ratio is 81% and the destination is 81.8%. Therefore, on the basis of migration Barnsley MB is a self-contained Housing Market Area.

3.16 In terms of defining market areas, NPPG does not suggest an appropriate self-containment figure. However, the ONS provides a definition of Travel to Work areas as:



‘The current criterion for defining TTWs is that generally at least 75% of an area’s resident workforce in the area and at least 75% of the people who work in the area also live in the area…however, for areas with a working population in excess of 25,000, self-containment rates as low as 66.7% are accepted’4

3.17 On this basis, it can be concluded that Barnsley MB cannot be considered to be self-contained in terms of travel to work but part of a wider functional economic area with linkages in particular to the Sheffield and Leeds City Regions.

Concluding comments

3.18 The purpose of this chapter has been to consider Barnsley MB and its inter-relationships with other areas. This reflects the requirements of PPG Paragraph 2a-011. By reviewing house prices, migration and travel to work patterns, the extent to which Barnsley is a self-contained Housing Market Area can be determined. PPG establishes that areas within which a relatively high proportion of household moves (typically 70%) are contained is a self-contained Housing Market Area.

3.19 Regarding migration, analysis of the 2011 census identifies containment ratios of 81% (origin) and 81.8% (destination). Barnsley MB can therefore be described as a self-contained housing market on the basis of migration.

3.20 The degree is containment is lower when travel to work data are considered. This indicates that although 76.9% of the workforce in Barnsley MB also lives in the district, 40% commute out to other areas, mainly to locations in the Leeds and Sheffield City Regions. Barnsley is therefore part of wider functional economic areas. As commented in the 2014 SHMA, increasing employment opportunities within the Borough has the potential to reduce the propensity to commute out of the Borough to work and increase the extent of self-containment with regards to employment.

3.21 For the purposes of Local Plan policy making, Barnsley is an appropriate Housing Market Area, whilst recognising its functional interactions with neighbouring districts.

3.22 Since the SHMA 2014 update was completed Leeds City Region has undertaken further work on housing market geographies. The draft report shows the boundary between Barnsley and Wakefield as less permeable, indicating less future movement between the two. It continues to show a relationship with Sheffield. This report is almost complete and therefore should be available by the time of submission.

3.23 We are engaging with all relevant neighbouring local authorities and prescribed bodies

under the Duty to Co-operate in accordance with statutory requirements under the Localism Act 2011 among others. Engagement is ongoing throughout the Local Plan process and began at the start of the Local Plan process in preparing the consultation draft Local Plan 2014.

3.24 Engagement with neighbouring authorities under Duty to Co-operate will continue to

further explore this issue. It is also recognised that there may be a change in market areas arising from the aspirations of the Local Plan.

3.25 Discussions have taken place with City Region authorities and bodies during which we

have received no objections to the strategy contained in the Barnsley Local Plan. We have explained the strategic approach in the Local Plan to all such bodies. Our strategy has been discussed with and accepted by all representatives at all times. We intend to

4https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/com

mutingtoworkchangestotraveltoworkareas/2001to2011



meet our proposed housing requirement within the borough and therefore have not had to look outside our boundaries to other authorities to meet our need. We consider that we have identified those respects in which our Local Plan could have an impact on neighbouring planning areas and properly engaged with neighbouring authorities on a co-operative basis in such cases. We consider we have fully complied with our duties in this regard. We are not obliged to produce joint plans with other authorities and consult on them, only to consider whether that should be done. This is consistent with the High Court decision of Zurich Assurance Ltd v Winchester City Council and South Downs National Park Authority [2014] EWHC 758 (Admin).

3.26 One of the proposed allocations within Barnsley’s borough boundary has been

allocated on the basis that it can count towards meeting Sheffield’s housing need. This is the former Paper Mill at Oughtibridge, Local Plan reference AC44. Whilst part of the site lies within Barnsley, the impact of development is on Sheffield in terms of infrastructure, services etc.

4.0 Objectively Assessed Housing Need (OAHN)

4.1 In line with the National Planning Policy Framework and following the abolition of the

Regional Spatial Strategy, Barnsley MBC has to establish what its ‘Objectively Assessed Housing Need’ (OAHN) is. This has been done using the methodology agreed as a common approach across Leeds City Region, set out by Edge Analytics. The diagram setting out this methodology can be found at appendix 1. The methodology starts with the definition of key inputs such as the Plan Period, Housing Completions and REM Job Growth Forecasts. Following the definition of assumptions, population and alternative trend projection scenarios were tested.

4.2 Edge Analytics have been commissioned by Leeds City Region to do some further work

with individual authorities, following on from the demographic forecast work they have done for the City Region as a whole to look at housing growth arising from the job growth aspirations in the Strategic Economic Plan. This work has also been done across Sheffield City Region.

4.3 The Inspector’s initial questions dated 14th February, 2017 sought clarity on what the

Objectively Assessed Need figure is and what the housing requirement is. In order to clarify this point Arc 4 have prepared an addendum to the Barnsley SHMA 2014. This has been supported by updated demographic modelling work by Edge Analytics.

4.4 Figure 4.1 below from the SHMA addendum sets out how the OAHN figure has been arrived at, presented in the form of the flow diagram from the PAS guidance, 2015. The text below sets out extracts from the SHMA addendum 2017 to explain and summarise each step of the diagram in respect of arriving at the Objectively Assessed Need figure. Defining the Housing Market Area

4.5 The SHMA 2014 and the SHMA addendum 2017 have considered the appropriate housing market area for Barnsley and its inter-relationships with other areas. This reflects the requirements of PPG Paragraph 2a-011. By reviewing house prices, migration and travel to work patterns, the extent to which Barnsley is a self-contained Housing Market Area can be determined. PPG establishes that areas within which a relatively high proportion of household moves (typically 70%) are contained is a self-contained Housing Market Area. Regarding migration, analysis of the 2011 census identifies containment ratios of 81% (origin) and 81.8% (destination). Barnsley MB can therefore be described as a self-contained housing market on the basis of migration.



4.6 The degree is containment is lower when travel to work data are considered. This indicates that although 76.9% of the workforce in Barnsley MB also lives in the district, 40% commute out to other areas, mainly to locations in the Leeds and Sheffield City Regions. Barnsley is therefore part of wider functional economic areas. As commented in the 2014 SHMA, increasing employment opportunities within the Borough has the potential to reduce the propensity to commute out of the Borough to work and increase the extent of self-containment with regards to employment.

4.7 For the purposes of Local Plan policy making, Barnsley is an appropriate Housing Market Area, whilst recognising its functional interactions with neighbouring districts.



4.8 Demographics

4.9 PPG Paragraph 2a-015 states that plan makers should make use of the household projections published by DCLG as the starting point estimate of housing need. PPG



Paragraph 2a-016 states that ‘wherever possible, local needs assessments should be informed by the latest available information’.

4.10 At the time of preparing the 2014 SHMA evidence, the latest official population projections (2012-based) were used in accordance with PPG Paragraph 2a-016; however, 2012-based DCLG household projection headship rates had not been published. The demographic starting point presented in the 2014 SHMA was the 2012-based projections (725) adjusted to reflect a blend of headship rates from 2008 and 2011 CLG household projections available at the time to 806.

4.11 An update of the demographic analysis and forecasts was prepared in March 2017 which uses the latest (2014-based) projections. This establishes a baseline annual requirement of 880 dwellings and brings the evidence base to inform the OAN calculation fully up to date.

Adjusting the projections

4.12 The PPG recommends adjustments are made to the household projections with reference to local demographic trends, future jobs, past delivery and Market Signals and other local circumstances not captured by past trends. Each of these is now considered in turn.

Local demographic trends

4.13 Whilst the official 2014-based ONS population and DCLG household projections form the ‘starting point’ of the assessment of housing need, the PPG states that it is appropriate to consider ‘alternative assumptions in relation to the underlying demographic projections and household formation rates’ of the local area (PPG Paragraph 2a-017).

4.14 In line with the PPG, Edge Analytics have developed a range of alternative demographic scenarios. The 2014-based population projections from ONS provide the official ‘benchmark’ scenario, with household growth assessed using household headship rate assumptions from the 2014-based DCLG projections. For comparison with this official benchmark, a number of ‘alternative trend’ scenarios have been developed, including

alterative migration assumptions.

4.15 The Edge analysis also considers headship rate sensitivities. Nationally, younger age groups have been more adversely affected by housing supply and unaffordability issues, which in some areas may have led to ‘suppressed’ rates of household formation. Therefore, each of the demographic scenarios has been run with alternative headship rate assumptions that examine an ‘improvement’ in the headship rates of the younger age groups. In the 2014-based Return sensitivity, headship rates in the male younger age groups (15-44) return to their 2001 values by 2024, continuing the original rate of growth thereafter.

4.16 Table 4.1 summarises the range of scenarios and dwelling requirements. These outputs also assume a 4% dwelling vacancy rate fixed over the Plan Period.



Table 4.1 Dwelling requirements under alternative scenarios using 2014-based and alternative headship rates

Scenario Headship rates HH-14 HH-14 Return

PG – 5yr 968 1,083

PG – 10yr 967 1,080

SNPP-2014 880 995

SNPP-2012 808 920

4.17 Having reviewed the latest demographic and household projections and considered alternative assumptions relating to migration and headship rates in line with PPG, it is recommended that:

I. the baseline dwelling requirement is 880 based on the latest 2014-based projections which updates the evidence presented in the 2014 SHMA and accords with PPG Paragraph 2a-016.

II. That an adjustment is made to reflect alternative assumptions in relation to the underlying demographic projections and household formation rates of the local areas which accords with PPG paragraph 2a-017. This requires a consideration of migration assumptions and alternative headship rates.

III. Regarding migration assumptions, scenarios have considered dwelling requirements based on short- and long-term trends. Under the long-term migration trend which arguably takes account of longer-term economic and housing market cycles, the dwelling requirement increases to 967 each year.

IV. Regarding alternative headships rates, each of the demographic scenarios have been run with an alternative headship rate assumption which reflects a ‘recovery’ in household formation rates in the younger age groups (15-44). This reflects the approach recommended in the LPEG report5 which considers an adjustment to local household formation rates to reflect upon the potential impact of higher headship rates if achieved amongst younger age groups. Under the 2014-based projections, this increases dwelling need to 115 each year to 995 and under the PG-10yr migration scenario the dwelling need increases by 113 each year to 1,080.

V. In conclusion, an analysis of ‘alternative assumptions in relation to the underlying demographic projections and household formation rates’ of the local area results in a recommendation of a need to increase the baseline need (880) up to 967 (to take account of long-term migration trends) over the 2014-33 Plan Period. Using the 2014-return headship rate would increase the baseline need to 995 and long-term migration need to 1,080. It is recommended therefore that the baseline demographic requirement for Barnsley MB is within the range 967 to 1,080.

5 Local Plan Experts Group: Local Plans Report to the Communities Secretary and to the Minister of Housing Man

Planning March 2016



4.18 Context to previous housing requirement figures and delivery Table 1

Evidence / Methodology Resulting Housing Requirement (per Annum)

Regional Strategy (Now Revoked) 2008 to 2026

1015

Adopted Core Strategy 2008 to 2026 1194

CLG Household Projections 2008 based 970

‘What Homes Where’ Toolkit 989

CLG Interim Household Projections 2011 based

908

Arup’s indicative analysis of CLG 2012 based population projections to give a HH requirement

990

SHMA Estimated Dwelling Requirement (table 4.12)

1084

Past completion rates 2004 – 2014 (Average)

822 (Best year: 2004/5 1305 worst year: 2009/10 556)

Past Delivery and Market Signals

4.19 Chapter 3 presented information on Market Signals and past trends in delivery. This considered signals relating to price and quantity and compared Barnsley MB with neighbouring districts, the region and England. This did not suggest a need to adjust the OAN to take account of market signals.

4.20 Regarding past trends in delivery, over the period 2011/12 and 2015/16, an annual average of 715 dwellings have been built across Barnsley MB. There are however no development constraints and any under-delivery is more likely to relate to market conditions and developer appetite for delivery.

4.21 Regarding market signals and past trends in delivery:

VI. It is recommended that the OAN is not adjusted to take account of market signals; and

VII. No adjustment is necessary to take account of past delivery.

Employment trends

4.22 PPG paragraph 2a-018 states that ‘plan makers should make an assessment of the likely change in job numbers based on past trends and/or economic forecasts as appropriate and also having regard to the growth of the working age population in the housing market area’. Edge Analytics have approached this in two ways: firstly, by considering the potential change in the labour force by applying key assumptions on future economic activity rates, level of unemployment and balance of commuting between resident workers and local jobs; and secondly by considering future economic forecasts and the extent to which these could be supported by Barnsley MB’s working age population.

Demographic scenarios: labour force and job growth implications

4.23 The labour force and job growth implications under alternative demographic scenarios can be evaluated through the application of key assumptions on Barnsley MB’s future



economic activity rates, level of unemployment and balance of commuting between resident workers and local jobs. This has been considered by Edge Analytics. In a trend-based scenario, the size of the resident labour force and the number of jobs that can be supported are sensitive to adjustments to these key factors. The following set of assumptions has been applied to the demographic scenarios:

Economic activity rates: 2011 census economic activity rates by sex and age group (16-89) with adjustments made to the older age groups (60-64, 65-69, 70-74 and 75-89). These adjustments have been made in line with the 2015 labour force market analysis from the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR);

The unemployment rate determines the proportion of the labour force that is unemployed (and as a result, the proportion that is employed). Unemployment incrementally reduces from the 2015 value of 6% to the lowest historical unemployment rate of 4% by 2033.

A fixed commuting ratio of 1.25 has been applied throughout the forecast period.

4.24 Edge Analytics also prepared variant scenarios linked to alternative commuting and economic activity rate sensitivities.

4.25 For each of the Barnsley MB demographic scenarios, Edge Analytics have applied these assumptions to derive an estimate of the changing size of the labour force that the population growth implies, and the level of employment growth that could be supported under these assumptions. (Table 4.2). Analysis indicates that under the SNPP-2014 baseline scenario a jobs growth of 448 each year could be supported and under the PG-10 year scenario this increases to 480 each year.

Table 4.2 Labour force and jobs-growth outcomes 2014-2033

Scenario Average Annual Jobs Growth

PG – 5yr 494

PG – 10yr 480

SNPP-2014 448

SNPP-2012 364

Economic forecasts

4.26 PPG paragraph 2a-018 states that ‘plan makers should make an assessment of the likely change in job numbers based on past trends and/or economic forecasts as appropriate and also having regard to the growth of the working age population in the housing market area’.

4.27 In consideration of future jobs in Barnsley MB, three jobs-led scenarios have been developed (Table 4.3). Edge Analytics also ran sensitivity analysis based on alternative commuting ratios and economic activity rates (Table 4.4). The Council’s overall strategic vision is to support jobs growth in line with the ‘jobs-led policy-on’ scenario and it is recommended that this is considered as part of the OAN calculation.



Table 4.3 Summary of jobs-led scenarios

Scenario name Scenario description

Jobs-led – Policy Off Population growth is determined by the annual change in the number of jobs, as defined by the ‘Policy Off’ jobs forecast (a total increase of+10,976 FTE jobs 2013/14 – 2032/33)

Jobs-led – Policy On Population growth is determined by the annual change in the number of jobs, as defined by the BMBC’s ‘Policy On’ jobs forecast (a total increase of+28,689 FTE jobs 2013/14 – 2032/33)

Jobs-led – Mid Population growth is determined by the annual change in the number of jobs, as defined by the ‘mid-point’ between the ‘Policy Off’ and ‘Policy On’ FTE jobs forecast (a total increase of+19,833 FTE jobs 2013/14 – 2032/33)

Table 4.4 Summary of jobs-led variant scenarios

Scenario name Scenario description

Jobs-led – Policy On CR SENS

Commuting ratio incrementally decreases from 2011 Census (1.25) to 2001 Census commuting ratio (1.19) by 2033

Jobs-led – Policy On EA SENS

The 2014 aggregate economic activity rate (16-89) of 60.8% is maintained by 2033

Jobs-led – Policy On CR EA SENS

Adjustments to both the commuting ratio and economic activity rates, as defined by the ‘EA SENS’ and ‘CR SENS’ scenario

4.28 Table 4.5 summarises the dwelling and annual average jobs growth under the jobs-led scenarios and sensitivity scenarios.

Table 4.5 Dwelling and jobs growth outcomes 2014-2033 under core and sensitivity jobs-led scenarios

Core Scenario Average Annual

Dwelling Requirement Average Annual

Jobs Growth

Jobs-led – Policy On 1,910 1,462

Jobs-led – Mid 1,452 970

Jobs-led – Policy Off 992 478

Sensitivity Scenario Average Annual

Dwelling Requirement Average Annual

Jobs Growth

Jobs-led Policy On CR SENS 1,655 1,462

Jobs-led Policy On EA SENS 1,632 1,462

Jobs-led Policy On EA CR SENS 1,389 1,462



Summary of employment trends

4.28 This section has summarised material in the Edge Analytics report which considers the labour force and employment growth outcomes of the demographic scenarios through the application of economic activity rates, unemployment rates and commuting assumptions, together with analysis of future economic participation rates. Sensitivity analysis evaluating changes in commuting ratios and economic activity rates were also considered by Edge Analytics.

4.29 Having considered the potential change in labour force capacity and future economic forecasts, it can be concluded that:

VIII. All demographic scenario support an increase in the working age population and therefore support jobs growth. The 2014-SNPP baseline scenario supports an annual jobs growth of 448 and this increases to 480 under the PG-10year scenario;

IX. Over the 2014-2033 plan period, employment forecasts suggest an increase of between 478 and 1,462 jobs each year. The Council’s preferred scenario is the ‘jobs-led policy on’ scenario which seeks to deliver around 30,000 jobs over the period 2013/14 to 2032/33. Under this scenario, the annual dwelling need is 1,910 but sensitivity analysis linked to alternative economic activity and commuting ratio assumptions results in a range of dwelling need of between 1,389 and 1,655.

X. Improvements in economic activity rates and reducing unemployment rates are being experienced in Barnsley MB as shown in Table 4.6. It is therefore reasonable to take account of the variant scenario which reflects improving economic activity (Jobs–led Policy On EA SENS)

Table 4.6 Recent trends in economic activity, employment rate and unemployment trends

Time Period Economic Activity

Rate Employment Rate Unemployment

Rate

Oct 2010-Sep 2011 73.9 65.7 11.1

Oct 2011-Sep 2012 74.7 67.1 10.2

Oct 2012-Sep 2013 78.6 69.9 11.0

Oct 2013-Sep 2014 80.6 72.8 9.6

Oct 2014-Sep 2015 78.0 73.0 6.5

Oct 2015-Sep 2016 75.5 71.5 5.3

Source: Annual Population Survey

I. In summary, an assessment of the ‘likely change in job numbers based on past trends and/or economic forecasts as appropriate and also having regard to the growth of the working age population in the housing market area’ would suggest that an upward adjustment is required to take account of employment trends. It would be recommended that the OAN is within the range 967 (from demographic adjustments) up to 1,632 dwellings each year to take account of jobs growth linked to the Council’s preferred jobs-growth scenario. Changes in commuting ratios, with increasing proportions of the resident workforce working in Barnsley MB, would result in a narrowing of this range from 967 to 1,389



dwellings. It would be reasonable to consider a slight change in commuting ratios which implies that as the number of jobs in Barnsley MB increases, higher proportions of the workforce would live in the Borough.

4.31 One of the key objectives of the Local Plan is to improve sustainability, and reducing commuting ratios contributes to this.

4.32 Backlog

We have considered whether we need to include a further uplift to deal with the issue of backlog, and if so what time period we should calculate backlog from. We have concluded that no further uplift should be included. This is based on an Inspector’s letter regarding Amber Valley Core Strategy EIP dated 12th May, 2014 in which the Inspector concludes “… that no further addition to the above supply is necessary to compensate for deficits in 2008-11 against the former Regional Spatial Strategy. Although those years were nominally the first 3 of the plan I am not convinced that any other aspects of the strategy, such as its retail and employment land policies, would be undermined or made unsound in any identifiably material way by rebasing the housing provision from 2011…” Our approach was also informed by the High Court Judgement between Zurich Assurance Limited Claimant - and - (1)Winchester City Council (2) South Downs National Park Authority which concludes that the shortfall in housing delivery before the plan period begins should not be included in population and housing growth requirements looking into the future. This judgement states “there was no reason whatever for a person in 2011 seeking to draw up a current estimate of population growth and housing requirements looking into the future from that date to 2031 and using up-to-date evidence to do so, to add on to the estimated figures any shortfall against what had been estimated to be needed in the first phase of the previously modelled period included in the South East Plan.”. Paragraphs 94 and 95 deal with this issue Zurich Assurance Ltd v Winchester City Council and South Downs National Park Authority [2014] EWHC 758 (Admin).

4.33 From OAHN to housing requirement 4.34 The SHMA addendum 2017 sets a range for the OAHN figure of between 967 and 1389

dwellings per annum. 4.35 In order to establish our housing requirement figure from this range we have taken into

account the policy and supply factors, as set out in figure 4.1 of the PAS Objectively Assessed Need and Housing Targets Technical advice note (July 2015). 6 These are set out below:-

4.36 Supply Capacity

Source of supply Hectarage Potential Yield

Proposed Local Plan allocations

477.89 ha 14842 dwellings

Planning Permissions 6,100 Other potential sources of supply

Proposed Safeguarded Land Sites*

147.5 5,170 dwellings

Green Belt General Areas not 8272.95 330918 dwellings

6 http://www.pas.gov.uk/documents/332612/6549918/OANupdatedadvicenote/f1bfb748-11fc-4d93-834c-

a32c0d2c984d

http://www.pas.gov.uk/documents/332612/6549918/OANupdatedadvicenote/f1bfb748-11fc-4d93-834c-a32c0d2c984d

http://www.pas.gov.uk/documents/332612/6549918/OANupdatedadvicenote/f1bfb748-11fc-4d93-834c-a32c0d2c984d



considered through housing site selection methodology

Sites rejected through housing site selection methodology**

3267.1 ha

100170 dwellings

Windfalls 476 dwellings

*Around a further 30ha is located in the villages. No potential yield is included. All of these sites have been considered for development, but have been rejected for reasons set out in the housing and employment background papers and the evidence attached to them. There are no exceptional circumstances to justify changing the Green Belt boundary to take the safeguarded land in the villages into the Green Belt. Our strategic approach, set out in the adopted Core Strategy and retained in the emerging Local Plan, is not to focus development in the villages and accordingly we have not allocated land for development in the villages. However, the existence of safeguarded land gives Parishes the opportunity to identify a need for housing and allocate sites for, for example, affordable housing development, through Neighbourhood Plans. ** does not include any new proposed Safeguarded Land

4.37 Other potential areas of supply:

4.38 Proposed Safeguarded Land sites

The purpose of allocating safeguarded land is to provide land that can be considered at

the end of the plan period in a future plan review. The allocation of safeguarded land

aims to provide a greater degree of permanence to the proposed Green Belt boundary.

Notwithstanding paragraph 18.22 of the Publication draft Local Plan which suggests it

may be possible to release safeguarded before the end of the plan period in

exceptional circumstances such as no five year supply, it would be preferable not to

allocate these sites at this juncture.

4.39 Green Belt General Areas not considered through Housing Site Selection

Methodology

The General Areas in the Green Belt Review that were identified as performing as

‘relatively strong’ and ‘very strong’ have not been assessed through housing site

selection methodology. Whilst this theoretical supply would potentially yield 330918

dwellings, as set out below in the Policy Objectives section, it is considered reasonable

to seek to maintain the areas of Green Belt that are most strongly performing against

the Green Belt functions.

4.40 Rejected sites

The sites that have been rejected following stage 2 of the Housing Site Selection

methodology are not considered suitable as they have various site constraints including

flood risk, access issues etc.



4.41 Windfalls

A windfall allowance of 476 dwellings has been calculated and added to our housing supply. Paragraph 9.12 below sets out the methodology used to calculate this. Build out rates will be monitored and adjusted as necessary over the plan period to ensure that a five year supply is maintained and to ensure there is no over reliance on the estimated windfall allowance.

4.42 Cross Boundary Unmet Need No adjustment is proposed as there is no cross boundary unmet need required. Neighbouring authorities that are sufficiently advanced with their Local Plans have concluded that they are meeting their own needs within their boundaries. Other authorities are not sufficiently advanced to be in a position to establish their need, or whether they are able to accommodate it.

4.43 Policy Objectives

4.44 Spatial Strategy

Allocations have been proposed in the most sustainable settlements. It is considered

important to maintain the proposed settlement hierarchy. There is flexibility in policy

LG2 to enable development in the villages if required for viability reasons and to meet

local needs. It is therefore considered appropriate that no allocations are proposed in

the villages.

4.45 Green Belt

Green Belt is recognised to be an overriding constraint on supply in determining the

housing requirement. The Green Belt General Areas identified by the Green Belt review

that were assessed as fulfilling Green Belt purposes to a ‘relatively strong’ or ‘very

strong’ degree have not been assessed through the Housing Site Selection

Methodology. This approach is considered reasonable in order to maintain the most

strongly performing Green Belt, in line with existing and emerging national planning

policy.

4.46 Job Growth Ambitions

As set out in the Employment Background Paper (BP6) the Council is seeking to

improve the economic conditions of Barnsley through an aspirational yet realistic job

growth target. Paragraph 5.3.2 of Employment Land evidence produced by Mott

Macdonald in April 20167 sets out that 69ha could be developed within the first three

years of the Local Plan period (2014 to 2033). This represents 12% of the total land

proposed. Another 75ha (14%) could be developed in the medium term (4 to 10 years).

However, the bulk of the land (74%) is unlikely to be developed until 10 years into the

Plan period. In the first three years, net economic output (GVA) worth up to £66m could

be generated from the development of the most ’ready’ and attractive sites. A further

£101m could be generated in the medium term (4-10 years). The forecast delivery

timescales mean that it is not unreasonable to assume that a significant proportion of

employment land and job creation will not take place until later in the plan period and

7 https://www.barnsley.gov.uk/media/4708/eb37-barnsley-employment-land-report-mott-macdonald-april-

2016.pdf

https://www.barnsley.gov.uk/media/4708/eb37-barnsley-employment-land-report-mott-macdonald-april-2016.pdf

https://www.barnsley.gov.uk/media/4708/eb37-barnsley-employment-land-report-mott-macdonald-april-2016.pdf



therefore it is considered prudent not to set the housing requirement at the top end of

the range.

4.47 Affordable Housing An important element of the overall housing need for Barnsley is the need for new affordable housing. The analysis of housing need in the 2014 SHMA suggests there is an annual net imbalance of 292 affordable dwellings each year. This figure expresses the overall need from household survey evidence compared with the current supply of affordable housing. The 292 figure assumes that backlog need is cleared over a 10 year period. If the backlog was cleared over the Plan Period, the annual imbalance would reduce to 82 each year.

4.47.1 Estimated Delivery

In assessing the likely delivery of affordable housing from market-led developments, consideration must be given to both current and future supply. In terms of current supply, annual monitoring figures indicate a total of 303 affordable homes were built in the borough between 2014 and 2016. No data is available that identifies the proportion of affordable dwellings delivered through market-led developments and other sources. Figures are currently unavailable for 2016/17.

4.47.2 Contribution from extant planning permissions 885 dwellings:

In terms of potential contributions from extant planning permissions, 6100 dwellings currently have extant planning permission for residential development with an expected contribution of 885 affordable dwellings.

4.47.3 Contribution from Local Plan allocations 1396 dwellings: In terms of future supply, an analysis of delivery from Local Plan site allocations without planning permission at March 2017 would suggest that 1396 affordable dwellings are likely to be delivered.

4.47.4 Total estimated delivery 2584 dwellings: The overall likely supply from market-led development is therefore considered to be in the region of 2584 dwellings, which equates to 136 dwellings annually between 2014 and 2033. Supply=885+1396+303=2584 Annually=2584/19=136

4.47.5 Comparison between need and potential supply

4.47.6 Based on an annual requirement of 292 affordable dwellings and a supply of 136 dwellings there is an indicative shortfall of 156 affordable dwellings per annum if the backlog was cleared over a ten year period. This is based on the current housing requirement of 1100 dwellings per annum.

4.47.7 Annual requirement=292 affordable dwellings Estimated delivery based on 1100 dwelling housing requirement-136 dwellings



Indicative shortfall=156 dwellings (292-136)

4.47.8 The expected delivery of 136 affordable dwellings each year compares with a need based on the PPG methodology. This methodology is sufficiently flexible to include alternative assumptions regarding the time period over which the backlog of need is cleared. If the backlog of need is cleared over 10 years, the annual affordable imbalance is 292; if cleared over 15 years it is 144 and if cleared over the 19 year plan it is 82.

4.47.9 In reality, the authority does not meet the 292 target; increasing affordable housing provision in the borough by an average of 160 annually between 2012/13 and 2016/17.

Year AH Completions

2012/13 152

2013/14 183

2014/15 166

2015/16 137

2016/17 TBC

Source: HCA’s Housing Starts on Site and Completions by Programme and Tenure, England 4.47.10 The 160 average completions would however exceed the required affordable housing

targets should backlog be cleared over a 15 or 19 year period. The Council is therefore confident that the scale of likely affordable delivery is appropriate compared with the needs expressed through the PPG methodology over the Local Plan period

4.47.11 Potential to increase delivery of affordable housing

PPG Paragraph 2a-029 advises on how housing needs assessments should take account of affordable housing need:

The total affordable housing need should be considered in the context of its likely delivery as a proportion of mixed market and affordable housing developments, given the probable percentage of affordable housing to be delivered by market housing-led developments. An increase in the total housing figures included in the local plan should be considered where it could help deliver the required number of affordable homes’.

4.47.12 In order to deliver the full quantum of affordable dwellings through the market, the housing target would require uplift to 1880 dwellings per annum or 35,720 for the plan period. This is based on the total shortfall of 156 units per annum and application of a 20% affordable housing requirement to the additional 780 units (uplift from 1100 to 1880). The 20% requirement is considered a reasonable assumption for the purpose of this element of the calculation as this is the mid-point of the proposed affordable housing policy.

4.47.13 The difference between the existing housing requirement and upper OAHN is 289 dwellings per annum or 5491 for the full plan period. If the housing target was uplifted to this limit the housing requirement would be 26433 or 1391 dwellings annually. This scenario could deliver an additional 1098 affordable units across the plan period or 57.8 units per annum based on the application of a 20% affordable housing requirement to the additional 5491 units. A further 58 affordable units per annum would however still leave a shortfall of 98 affordable units per annum.



4.47.14 Conclusion on Affordable Housing

4.47.15 The council interprets PPG paragraph 2a-029 as guidance, but not a legal obligation or duty to inflate the housing figures of the plan beyond what it considers to be reasonable, or which could undermine other legitimate planning objectives.

4.47.16 A total number of 35,720 dwellings would be required in order to address the

imbalance of affordable housing solely through the affordable housing policy and ignoring any provision through the private sector. Based on the past delivery record, whilst positive during challenging economic circumstances, it is highly unlikely that housing completions in excess of 1880 dwellings could consistently be achieved throughout the plan period.

4.47.17 The upper limit of the OAHN would also require delivery of 1391 dwellings annually

and would not address the imbalance in full. Once again, it is unlikely that the council could achieve a consistent delivery of around 1400 units per annum over the full plan period.

4.47.18 It is considered unlikely that any local authority could fully address all of its affordable

housing needs through the market housing model. In reality the private sector and local authority will need to seek to deliver the shortfall through the Homes and Communities Agency’s Affordable Housing Programme and ‘second hand’ property acquisitions (including the return of long term empties back into use). In addition, households in need who cannot access the market can pay proportionately more for their housing above suggested affordable thresholds, people can share dwellings to reduce housing costs, and the private rented sector can accommodate households in need.

4.47.19 It is also worth noting that the definition of affordable housing for planning purposes is

currently under review and will potentially change to include low-cost market housing (Starter Homes). It is therefore considered a reasonable assumption that the future delivery of affordable housing will increase, given the proposed move towards a broader range of products, including low-cost market housing, as part of market-led housing developments.

4.47.20 The expected delivery of 136 affordable dwellings each year compares with a need of

292 based on the PPG methodology. This methodology is sufficiently flexible to include alternative assumptions regarding the time period over which the backlog of need is cleared. If the backlog of need is cleared over 10 years, the annual affordable imbalance is 292; if cleared over 15 years it is 144 and if cleared over the 19 year plan it is 82. The Council is therefore confident that the scale of likely affordable delivery is appropriate compared with the needs expressed through the PPG methodology over the Local Plan period, and can meet the affordable housing need in full assuming the backlog is cleared over the plan period.

4.47.21 In conclusion, the council considers that increasing the housing requirement to meet a

greater proportion of the affordable housing need is unnecessary, undeliverable and is in conflict with other planning objectives such as the protection of Green Belt. Further analysis of the affordable housing needs and local authority activity to meet that need is discussed in the Affordable Housing section below (Section 5).

4.48 Deliverability

Deliverability of sites has been scored through the housing site selection methodology. It is considered important that the sites that are allocated are deliverable.



4.49 Overall Conclusion on proposed Housing Requirement

The above factors have been considered in determining our housing requirement. It is concluded that the 1,100 per annum figure quoted in the Publication version draft Local Plan (previously referred to as our OAN figure), is an appropriate housing requirement figure. 1,100 is within the OAHN range recommended by the SHMA addendum 2017, which is based on up to date demographic modelling. It is considered that the issues raised above justify setting the requirement at this mid-point of the range rather than higher, in order to ensure the local plan is deliverable, and in accordance with Green Belt policy. It is considered that the 1,100 figure represents an ambitious and aspirational figure which addresses housing needs and supports economic growth ambitions, and would still require a step up in delivery. The 1,100 per annum figure, expressed as at least 20,900 net additional homes over the plan period figure in policy H1, whilst not a ceiling, means that Barnsley would be able to meet its own housing requirement.

5.0 Affordable Housing

5.1 The SHMA update 2014 provides an analysis of general market supply and demand suggests that demand exceeds supply across all sub-areas and:

There are overall shortfalls of detached and semi-detached houses and bungalows, but sufficient supply of terraced houses and flats;

There are shortfalls of all property sizes.

Future development should focus on delivering to address identified shortfalls and reflect household aspirations.

The SHMA and SHMA Addendum 2017 identified an annual net shortfall of 292 affordable dwellings assuming the backlog is cleared over a ten year period. If the backlog was cleared over the Plan Period, the annual imbalance would reduce to 82 per year.

A tenure split of 78.8% affordable (social) rented and 21.2% intermediate tenure is suggested.

In summary, key drivers in determining the tenure and type of future development include:

The need to continue development to satisfy household aspirations, in particular the development of detached and semi-detached houses and a range of property sizes to offset identified market imbalances;

Responding to the impact of demographic change on dwelling requirements and in particular developing an increasing range of housing and support products for older people;

Delivering additional affordable housing to help offset the identified net shortfalls; and diversifying the range of affordable options by developing intermediate tenure dwellings and products;

The economic viability of delivering affordable housing on sites across the Barnsley MB area.

The current economic circumstances clearly present a number of challenges to the delivery of housing and in particular the delivery of affordable rented housing and intermediate market dwellings.



5.2 Recent viability work by Andrew Golland has factored in the affordable housing need information from the SHMA, and supports the approach taken to the percentages sought in Policy H8 Affordable Housing of the consultation draft Local Plan which is set out below:-

Housing developments of 15 or more dwellings will be expected to provide affordable housing.

30% affordable housing will be expected in Penistone and Dodworth and Rural West, 20% in Darton and Barugh, 10% in Bolton, Goldthorpe, Thurnscoe , Hoyland, Wombwell, Darfield, North Barnsley and Royston, South Barnsley and Worsbrough and the Rural East.

The developer must show arrangements have been put in place to keep the new homes affordable.

Where the need for affordable housing is proven in rural villages, which cannot be met on infill sites or in nearby larger settlements, small scale rural exception sites will be supported either within the village or as small extensions to the village, as a means to providing affordable housing.

We recognise the importance of providing affordable housing in villages. Whilst no housing allocations have been proposed through the consultation draft Local Plan, this draft policy allows small scale development to come forward as a rural exception site where a need is proven and there are no other alternative sites. This approach is consistent with the paragraph 54 of the NPPF. In addition, we have carried forward 30 hectares of safeguarded land in the villages which may allow Parishes to allocate sites to meet local needs should they decide to prepare a neighbourhood plan. Furthermore, in the support text to the safeguarded land policy, we are also suggesting that provision of affordable housing to meet local needs could be allowed if it is consistent with Green Belt policy. This is to avoid a situation where safeguarded land is deemed to have greater protection than the Green Belt. Starter homes

5.3 We recognise that the Housing & Planning Act introduces duties relating to Starter Homes and includes them in the definition of affordable housing. Following the bill received Royal Ascent we considered amending the affordable housing policy in this Publication version of the Local Plan. However regulations are yet to come into force. Given that these are not expected before submission we will review our approach when we have the benefit of seeing the content of any forthcoming regulations, and will incorporate into a Supplementary Planning Document. This will include consideration how the starter homes requirement for certain developments would relate to viability constraints, specifically in areas such as Barnsley where the market values are already quite affordable.

5.4 Self build and custom build homes As part of masterplanning advocated in site specific policies we would expect to see a

proportion of plots to meet demand on the register. There is no demand at present. It is not expected there would be significant demand sufficient to require identification of a separate stream in OAHN.



5.5 Homes and Communities Agency - Affordable Homes Programme Bidding for the 2015 to 2018 Affordable Homes Programme closed on 25 November 2015. As a Local Authority area, Barnsley MBC secured grant funding to deliver 6 firm schemes with RSL Partners, delivering a total of 172 (182 following re-allocation) units. These are/ have been delivered as below:

RSL SCHEME UNITS PRODUCT STATUS

South Yorkshire Housing Association

Highstone Road, Worsbrough

6 units A RENT Completed Dec 2016

Leeds and Yorkshire Housing Association

Newstead Road, Athersley North

27 units A RENT To be Completed June 2017

Yorkshire Housing Association

Lamb Lane, Monk Bretton

24 units A RENT Completed 2016

Yorkshire Housing Association

Hill End Road, Mapplewell

25 units A RENT On-site -To be completed end 2017

Together Housing Snape Hill Road, Darfield

30 units A RENT On-site - To be completed end 2017

Together Housing Oakfields (original 60 units)

0 units A RENT Allocation amended to King Street and Nanny Marr Road scheme below due to inability to acquire the site.

Together Housing Nanny Marr Road, Darfield

40 units A RENT On-site – To be completed end 2017

Together Housing King Street, Hoyland

30 units A RENT On-site – To be completed end 2017

Total: 182

The Council also delivered 37 units directly as part of the Council House Build Programme, accessing funding via the HCA’s 11-15 programme, but delivering the units in summer 2016.In April 2016, the Homes and Communities Agency (HCA) opened bidding to the Shared Ownership and Affordable Homes Programme 2016 to 2021 (SOAHP 2016 to 2021) through publication of a Prospectus. This programme did not include an option to bid for grant to deliver Affordable Rented accommodation and, as such, was not fully subscribed. Initial allocations of capital grant for new affordable housing schemes were announced on 5 January 2017; these did not allocate the entire available budget, with £1.3 billion remaining available. From a Barnsley perspective, only two RSL’s submitted bids for Shared Ownership schemes in the Borough. These have not yet been brought forward. Following the Chancellor’s Autumn Statement on the 23 November 2016, the government reaffirmed its continued commitment to extending home ownership, including through the SOAHP 2016 to 2021, announcing an additional £1.4 billion to deliver a further 40,000 affordable homes. This includes funding for Affordable Rented units. The Sheffield City Region is currently working on a joint bid submission to the re-released 2016-21 programme. This includes an ask for a



devolved budget of £23m to accelerate the delivery of affordable homes across the region.

6.0 Main Findings of the Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Study

(SHELAA)

6.1 The following text is the executive summary of the Strategic Housing and Employment Land Availability Study (SHELAA) produced by Arups in 2016. The full report and associated appendices are available on our website.

7.0 Housing Trajectory 7.1 Existing Housing Trajectory The trajectory below is taken from the latest available

five year supply note (2015/16-19/20) and based on the Core Strategy housing requirement.

Updated 2012/13 Barnsley Housing Trajectory (2008/09 to 2025/26)

Year Gross Dwellings Losses Net Dwellings

2008-09* 1076 236 840

2009-10* 793 237 556

2010-11* 1153 155 998

2011-12* 919 79 840

2012-13* 728 71 657

2013-14* 821 74 747

2014-15 1150 25 1125

2015-16 1250 25 1225

2016-17 1450 25 1425

2017-18 1500 25 1475

2018-19 1501 25 1476

2019-20 1475 25 1450

2020-21 1475 25 1450

2021-22 1475 25 1450

2022-23 1475 25 1450

2023-24 1475 25 1450

2024-25 1475 25 1450

2025-26 1475 25 1450

2008/26 overall requirement

22666 1152 21514

2013/14 – 2025/26 requirement

17176 300 16876

2013/14-2017/18 five year requirement

6851 125 6726

* Based on actual recorded completions and losses. 7.2 The basic five year net requirement for the 2014/5 to 2018/19 period is 6726 dwellings

net. 7.3 Lapsed permissions For five year supply purposes we apply a lapsed permission rate. However this rate is

not applied in the Local Plan Housing Trajectory as this is not considered appropriate.



Five year supply notes will be updated on an annual basis to assist in a plan, monitor, manage approach.

7.4 The NPPF Buffer

The NPPF requires that the five year housing net requirement is buffered by bringing forward an additional 5% of the basic net requirement from later in the plan period. This is to ‘ensure choice and competition in the market for land’. Where there ‘has been a record of persistent under delivery of housing’ this buffer should increase to 20%. It is considered reasonable to utilise the Core Strategy Trajectory to determine whether there has been a persistent under delivery. In accordance with the Sketchley House appeal (APP/K2420/A/13/22083) the use of a trajectory is considered a reasonable and sensible approach based on the unlikelihood of a uniform delivery and reality of economic cycles. The Core Strategy trajectory anticipated a period of reduced delivery but sought to boost the supply of housing overall through an uplifted housing target.

7.5 The table below lays out housing delivery in the borough over the last 10 years and compares it to the annual net requirement for each year.

Housing delivery 2004/05-2013/14

Year Gross

Dwellings Losses

Net Dwellings

Net Requirement

Difference between

requirement and delivery

2004-05 1497 192 1305 840 +465

2005-06 1101 166 935 840 +95

2006-07 1093 177 916 840 +76

2007-08 1497 355 1142 840 +302

2008-09 1076 236 840 860 -20

2009-10 793 237 556 546 +10

2010-11 1153 155 998 700 +298

2011-12 919 79 840 800 +40

2012-13 728 71 657 862 -205

2013/14 821 74 747 996 -249

1. The net requirement for 2002-03 to 2007-08 is derived from the Yorkshire & Humber Regional Spatial Strategy which has now been revoked but which set the borough’s requirement at this time. 2. The net requirement for 2007-08 to 2012-13 is derived from the original Core Strategy trajectory. 7.6 The above table demonstrates that Barnsley has a good record of delivering housing

above its net requirement. Over the ten year period the borough has delivered a surplus of 812 dwellings. This justifies the use of a 5% buffer as described above.

7.7 The table below lays out the net requirement taking into account an NPPF buffer of 5% Net housing requirement following adjustment

Year

Original Core Strategy

Trajectory Net Requirement

Adjusted Net Requirement (08/09 – 13/14

Deficit)

5% NPPF Buffer

Actual Net Requirement

14/15 1100 1125 56 1181

15/16 1200 1225 61 1286



16/17 1400 1425 71 1496

17/18 1450 1475 74 1549

18/19 1450 1476 74 1550

Total 6600 6726 336 7062

7.8 The above table shows that the overall net requirement for the borough for the five year

period 2014/15 to 2018/19 is 7062 net dwellings. 7.9 Proposed Housing Trajectory

The trajectory illustrated in the graph below shows how we propose to meet the requirement of 20,900 homes to the end of the plan period and illustrates projected housing completions 2014 - 2033 (net). We will take a plan, monitor, manage approach and this trajectory will be reviewed at least every five years. Future reviews will inevitably start to consider future requirements beyond the plan period.

7.10 As stated at paragraph 7.3 above no lapsed permission rate has been applied for the purposes of the Local Plan Housing Trajectory.

7.9 A number of assumptions were made when building the trajectory:

Sites below 20 hectares will be built out at 35 dwellings per year

Sites over 20 hectares are likely to be built out by at least two developers and will contribute 70 dwellings a year

Higher build out rates have been assumed on some of the mixed use sites given they are larger in scale

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

14

/15

15

/16

16

/17

17

/18

18

/19

19

/20

20

/21

21

/22

22

/23

23

/24

24

/25

25

/26

26

/27

27

/28

28

/29

29

/30

30

/31

31

/32

32

/33Housing Trajectory

Dwellings per annum



Sites with full planning permission granted after 1st April 2014 will not deliver any dwellings until at least year 2

Sites with outline planning permission granted after 1st April 2014 or which are likely to be granted planning permission imminently will not deliver any dwellings until at least year 3

Sites in the green belt will not deliver any dwellings until at least year 5 following on from adoption of the plan and then the grant of planning permission

Delivery on sites with extant planning permission from is taken from research carried out as part of the five year supply monitoring.

For other sites judgement and other evidence such as SHLAA and HSSM assessments have been used to attribute them to a period. However without any imminent prospect of planning permission it is unlikely they will deliver any dwellings before year 4.

The Trajectory above is indicative and will need to be regularly reviewed and updated. It may well change substantially as more evidence is gathered about the deliverability of sites over the plan period.

7.10 For Local Plan housing allocations the calculations below assume a build out rate of 35

dwellings per year on sites under 20 ha and 70 per year on sites over 20 ha. Larger mixed use sites assume a higher build out rate due to their scale.

7.11 For sites over 10 dwellings with planning permission build out rates are based on

evidence supplied by stakeholders or decisions taken by the Officer Assessment Group as part of research carried out on the boroughs five year supply.

7.12 An appendix in A3 format is available separately to this Background Paper which

provides the data from which the trajectory graph has been calculated. 7.13 The trajectory shows completions consistently exceeding 1,000 dwellings per annum

from 16/17 to 23/24 before briefly falling away and then gradually increasing and levelling off towards the end of the plan period. This is partly because we are able to include a windfall allowance for the next 5 years and also reflects the planning permissions already granted. We do not consider that figures in excess of 1,200 per annum to be unrealistic not least as we achieved a figure in excess of 1,300 in 2004/05. However, if the delivery in the years to 16/17 to 23/24 is below that forecasted, the trajectory does allow for some additional delivery in later years without the figures in these years becoming excessively high.

8.0 Current Situation with regard to the Supply 8.1 Housing Site Selection Method Statement

Barnsley Council is seeking to identify an appropriate portfolio of sites to allocate for housing in the Local Plan to meet the Borough’s objectively assessed housing need over the plan period, up to 2033. This is being prepared in line with Government requirements, which are summarised below.

8.2 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF) states that local planning authorities

should ‘use their evidence base to ensure that their Local Plan meets the full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing…including identifying key sites which are critical to the delivery of the housing strategy over the plan period’(para. 47).



8.3 NPPF further states that local planning authorities should ‘identify and update annually a supply of deliverable sites sufficient to provide five years worth of housing against their housing requirements with an additional buffer of 5% (moved forward from later in the plan period) to ensure choice and competition in the market for land’ (para 47). This buffer is increased to 20%, again moved forward from later in the plan period, where there has been persistent under deliver of housing.

8.4 Local planning authorities must ‘identify a supply of specific, developable sites or broad

locations for growth’ (NPPF, para 47). Footnotes to paragraph 47 of NPPF describe how sites must be suitable, available and achievable. The Government’s ‘Strategic Housing Land Availability Practice Guidance’ clarifies the definitions of these three elements:

1. Suitability – policy restrictions, physical problems or limitations, potential impacts and

environmental conditions 2. Availability – there are no known legal or ownership problems in bringing the site

forward for development 3. Achievability – it is economically viable to bring the site forward and there is capacity for

the developer to complete and sell. This impacted by market factors, cost factors and delivery factors, such as build out rates.

8.5 Initial Exclusions from the Housing Site Selection Methodology (HSSM)

A number of sites were excluded from assessment through the HSSM. A schedule of these sites is available. In summary the main reasons for excluding sites were:

That they have planning permission as of 1st April 2014. It should be noted that some sites that have planning permission but which are considered strategic due to their size or long term development phasing have still been allocated in the Local Plan.

That they were under construction or built out as of 1st April 2014.

They are less than 0.4 hectare in area.

They have an overriding constraint which means they cannot be developed.

They are not available as the land owner has specifically stated they have no intention of developing the site in the plan period.

A schedule of initially excluded sites is available here

https://www2.barnsley.gov.uk/media/3874520/sites_initially_excluded_from_housing_site_selection.pdf

All other sites progressed to stage 1 of the HSSM. Schedules are available of sites that have been considered through the HSSM.

8.6 Appendix 2 sets out the detailed criteria covered in stage 1 of the methodology under

the following topic headings:-

Transport

Proximity to services

Efficient use of land

Environment

Physical problems/ limitations 8.7 Appendix 3 sets out the detailed criteria covered in stage 2 of the methodology under

the following topic headings:-



Suitability

Availability

Achievability

Market Attractiveness

Appendices 4 and 5 provide further detail on the housing site selection methodology. Appendix 4 gives the list of ‘Essential and Other Facilities’ considered. Appendix 5 is a housing site selection form to illustrate the information that has been collated for all the sites considered.

8.8 Housing Site Selection Methodology Stage 3

The final stage of the methodology involves the formation of an officer group to discuss sites included in the process.

8.9 Firstly all sites outside the green belt are considered and the overall score and

information gathered through the application of the methodology considered. Planning judgement is then applied to decide if the site should be allocated for residential development in the draft Local Plan.

8.10 Following this it is ascertained if enough sites have been identified that are deliverable

over the plan period to meet the objectively assessed need for housing in the borough. 8.11 If it is concluded that enough sites have not been identified it is then necessary to

consider sites in the green belt. At this stage the methodology links with the Green Belt Review. In most instances sites identified through the green belt review as ‘resultant parcels’ that could be released from the green belt if needs require this are considered through the HSSM. As with sites outside the green belt the overall score and information gathered through the application of the methodology is considered. Planning judgement is then applied to decide if sites should be allocated for residential development in the draft Local Plan. Schedules are available which lay out how sites have performed through the HSSM process.

8.12 At this stage indicative yields from sites are also calculated. The table below shows

how this is done:

Site Size (Gross) Gross : Net Ratio Applied

< 1 ha 0.9

1 – 10 ha 0.8

> 10 ha 0.75

8.13 It should be noted that if a site has gained planning permission the actual number of

permitted dwellings is used and the above gross: net ratios are not applied. The table of allocations in the Housing Background Paper indicates which sites this affects. All indicative densities are worked out at 40 dwellings per hectare based on the net density.

8.14 Local Plan policy H7 seeks 40 dwellings per hectare as a net minimum. However the

policy provides flexibility for both lower or higher densities to be achieved where appropriate.



8.15 Core Strategy policy CSP14 sought a minimum of 40 dwellings per hectare rising to 45 in good public transport corridors and 55 in town centres.

8.16 Appendix 9 demonstrates the densities that have been achieved in recent years on

sites large enough to potentially have been allocated in the Local Plan (has they not already come forward). Table A shows pre- Core Strategy densities and Table B shows those achieved since Core Strategy adoption in 2011. The overall net figure has gone from 45 dwellings per hectare (dph) to 33 dph since the adoption of the Core Strategy. Looking at the timescales of the monitoring data, our view is that table A shows densities that can be achieved during a more buoyant housing market and table B one where developers are more risk averse. We consider that to propose a figure of 40 dph net is a reasonable approach as the two tables suggest an average over a full economic/ housing market cycle of around 40.

8.17 The Local Plan recognises that some large, low density properties will be required as

part of our overall mix. 8.18 Sites have been assessed at an indicative density of 40 dwellings per hectare. We

anticipate that delivery on sites will in some cases be higher and lower than this figure, and therefore an indicative density of ‘about 40’ is considered a sensible approach.

8.19 The Local Plan density policy H7 Housing Mix and Efficient Use of Land, is an

amended version of CSP14, seeking a density of about 40 dwellings per hectares on most sites with flexibility built in to enable lower densities to be provided where appropriate. This flexible policy approach is considered sensible and will enable the market to decide what is appropriate and deliverable, and will provide flexibility throughout the plan period as demand for certain types of properties may change over time. This is considered particularly necessary to help facilitate development throughout the economic cycle in accordance with paragraph 174 of the NPPF.

8.20 Further site assessment work carried out on the sites in the villages proposed for low

density, high value housing has indicated that they are not the most sustainably located sites. In addition this draft Local Plan proposes to carry forward the spatial hierarchy from the adopted Core Strategy, with urban Barnsley and the Principal Towns being the focus for growth.

8.21 To ensure our objectively assessed housing need and an appropriate overall mix of

sites across the borough is being achieved throughout the economic cycle, it is intended to take a plan, monitor, manage approach. Any issues that arise from this that require a different approach to planning policy in respect of housing delivery will be dealt with through plan reviews.

8.22 As we have gained further information on sites we have made further reductions to the

net developable area, to ensure the indicative yield figures are as realistic as possible. The reasons for further reductions in the main relate to:-

8.23 Archaeology Archaeological scoping has been carried out. Where sites are known to have significant

potentially important remains on the site, the site area has been reduced by 2ha in order to reduce the overall yield on the site to give flexibility to ensure remains can be dealt with as appropriate.

8.24 Impact on Heritage Sites have been assessed for the potential impact on heritage assets that their

development may have. This may be in relation to impact on the setting of listed



buildings and/ or conservation areas; scheduled ancient monuments and intervisibility and impact on important views. Some site areas have been reduced to reduce overall yield in order to allow for setting issues to be considered in the future layout of the site. In some instances a hatched notation has been included on the Policies map to indicate an area of a site that cannot be developed given the adverse impact this would have on heritage assets. Appendix 6 sets out the methodology used to determine the likely impact on heritage assets.

8.25 Biodiversity Following ecological assessments being carried out, there are some parts of sites

which need to be retained in the interests of protecting biodiversity. These have been removed from the overall site area to give a realistic yield figure.

9.0 The Contribution of Planning Permissions to the Forward Supply of Dwellings in

the Local Plan 9.1 Part of the identified supply to meet the housing requirement laid out in the Local Plan

comes from planning permissions that were extant as of 1st April 2014. A windfall allowance is also included in the supply and how this has been determined is also laid out below.

9.2 The NPPF is clear that sites with planning permission can be included in the forward

supply but they need to be assessed for ‘deliverability’. It is clear that some planning permissions will not be implemented and the Council has carried out work to ascertain what is likely to be deliverable in the borough over the Local Plan period. For the purposes of the Local Plan dwellings that may not be delivered in the first five years are still included in the forward supply. It is clear that due to the size of some sites with planning permission that they will deliver dwellings after the first five years of the plan period and it is important that these are included in the supply. The Local Plan will deliver a five year supply for the borough throughout the plan period to 2033, through a combination of new allocations for residential development and extant planning permissions.

9.3 The Local Plan is also flexible enough to bring forward new sites through the grant of

planning permissions if it appears at any time during the plan period that there would be a likelihood of less than a 5 year supply of deliverable housing to meet the OAHN.

9.3 Assessment of Deliverability Sites with planning permission for 10 dwellings or more

The NPPF is clear that sites with planning permission should be considered deliverable until the permission expires unless there is clear evidence that they will not be implemented in the five year period.

9.4 We asked for evidence of delivery from applicants and/or landowners. We did this

through a questionnaire, following up with phone calls in the event of non-response. We have used this market information to demonstrate the deliverable supply. We information was given on likely build out rates we have used this to calculate delivery over a five year period and over the plan period.

9.5 Where it was not possible to gain a market response about a site an Officer

Assessment Group was formed to assess each site based on local knowledge. The conclusions of this group have been used to demonstrate the deliverable supply on sites where the Council was not able to get a response. Additionally some sites



deliverability was assessed by research (for example where the site is now built out or has been granted planning permission after 1st April 2014). In this case the officer group also used its experience and local knowledge to decide a likely build out rate for relevant sites.

9.6 Based on the methodology outlined above 3541 dwellings can be delivered in the first

five years of the plan period. A further 1240 dwellings from these permissions will be delivered after the first five years.

9.7 Sites with planning permission for fewer than 10 dwellings

The publication version trajectory includes sites with permission as of 31 May 2016: a total of 1043 dwellings have full planning permission on smaller sites and 592 of these dwellings are expected to be delivered in the first 5 years of the plan period. This rate is based on actual completion in the years 14/15 and 15/16 and the remaining dwellings have been spread over an 8 year period.

9.8 Windfall Allowance The NPPF, at paragraph 48, states that local planning authorities may make an

allowance for windfalls in their five year supply ‘if they have compelling evidence that such sites have consistently become available in the local area and will continue to provide a reliable source of supply’. It is important to consider the NPPF definition of windfalls in relation to this paragraph as ‘sites which have not been specifically identified as available in the local plan process’.

9.9 Windfalls have historically comprised a significant element of completions in the borough

and it is reasonable to include an allowance in the five year supply. A methodology has been devised which allows an allowance to be calculated which is based on evidence taking into account the NPPF windfall definition.

9.11 The number of full and reserved matters windfall dwellings (as defined in the NPPF)

granted, on new sites, in the last 3 years is shown below: Figure 6: Windfall dwellings

Year Windfall

Dwellings

2011/12 307

2012/13 258

2013/14 284

9.12 The methodology takes an average of the above 3 years to arrive at an estimate that 283 windfalls will be granted each year up to 2018/19. Evidence from 2008/09 shows what percentage of windfalls granted were built out in the 5 subsequent years (Build Out % in the table below). When this is applied cumulatively 53.7% of those granted in the first year were built out in 5 years, 50.1% of those granted were built out in 4 years, 40.6% in 3 years, 21.7% in 2 years and 2.2% in 1 year. When these percentages are applied to the 283 windfall figure we get a total of 476 new windfall dwellings not on the system as at 1st April 2012 that may be built before 1st April 2017. This is demonstrated in the table below. Build out rates will be monitored and adjusted as necessary over the plan period to ensure that a five year supply is maintained and to ensure there is no over reliance on the estimated windfall allowance.



Figure 7: Build out rates

Year Build Out % Cumulative % Windfalls Build Out

2014/15 2.2 53.7 283 152

2015/16 19.6 50.1 283 142

2016/17 18.8 40.6 283 115

2017/18 9.5 21.7 283 62

2018/19 3.6 2.2 283 6

Total 476

10.0 Proposed spatial distribution

The table below shows the proposed distribution of dwellings across the borough.

Distribution of new homes for the period 2014 to 2033

Settlement Number of homes Planning

Permissions Total

% of Overall Supply**

Urban

Barnsley

6379 2900 9279 45

Cudworth 1162 64 1226 6

Dearne 2104 753 2857 14

Hoyland 2118 243 2361 11

Penistone 653 373 1026 5

Royston 828 454 1282 6

Wombwell 1498 639 2137 10

Other 0 681 681 3

Total 14742 6107 20849 100**

*The methodology used to calculate indicative dwellings that could be achieved on allocations that do not have planning permission is laid out in the background paper for housing.

A further 476 dwellings will be added to the overall total supply as a windfall allowance. The methodology for calculating this allowance is set out at paragraph 9.12 above.

** Percentages are rounded and as a result do not necessarily add up overall to 100%

10.1 This distribution is based on the settlement hierarchy approach of focussing development in Urban Barnsley and the Principal Towns. It also has regard to the changes made to the distribution of employment sites when compared with that put forward in the Core Strategy. In identifying this distribution regard was had to viability and deliverability considerations. As explained in the Local Plan Viability Study, we recognise that the numbers proposed in weaker submarkets such as Goldthorpe Principal Town are aspirational but we consider them to be realistic given the quantum of employment land proposed in Goldthorpe and the associated economic benefits of these sites coming



forward. Given the volatile nature of viability, we also consider that the sustainable credentials of such sites should take precedence given that these will apply throughout the whole of the plan period.

11.0 Housing Land Supply 11.1 Proposed Housing Allocations in the draft Local Plan

Totals exclude sites (or parts of sites) that already have planning permission Where a site has a zero in the indicative dwellings column this is because it has been granted planning permission. Dwellings with planning permission have been taken into account as part of our overall supply in order to avoid double counting. Where planning permission was granted after 1st April 2014, the sites are still being shown as allocations. The housing trajectory provides a list of planning permissions for sites above 10 dwellings and a total contribution from sites with planning permission below 10 dwellings.

Barnsley Urban

Site Reference

Site Size (ha) Indicative Dwellings

AC1 Former Woolley Colliery 3.9 86

AC2 Land south of Darton Lane, Staincross 4.4 64

AC3 Former William Freeman site, Wakefield Road 4.4 131

AC6 Longcar PDC, Longcar Lane 0.9 0

H5 Land South of Coniston Avenue, Darton, Barnsley 1.26 40

H13 Land East of Burton Road, Monk Bretton 9.1 218

H14 Land West of Wakefield Road, Mapplewell 13.8 135

H18 Land East of Smithy Wood Lane, Gilroyd 4.5 144

H19 LandNorth of Keresforth Road, Dodworth 7.7 231

H20 Land South of Bloomhouse Lane, Darton 8.7 209

H24 Land North of Carlton Road, Monk Bretton 2.8 90

H28 Former Priory School, Lundwood, Barnsley 7.2 0

H29 Land at Garden House Farm, Garden House Close, Monk Bretton

3.1 35

H31 Land to the West of Smithy Wood Lane, Gilroyd 1.1 36

H33 Land to the East of St Helens Avenue, Monk Bretton 3 96

H42 Land West of Wakefield Road, New Lodge 7.7 246

H44 Land North of West Green Way, West Green. 16.4 477

H48 Former Kingstone school, Broadway, Barnsley 6.9 0

H53 Land North of Wilthorpe Road, Wilthorpe 13.1 0

H54 Land off High Street, Dodworth 0.5 14

H57 Monk Bretton Reservoir and Land to the East of Cross Street, Monk Bretton

6.65 82

H59 Land at St Michael's Avenue, Carlton 1.2 38

H60 Land between Rotherham Road & Former Priory School Site, Cundy Cross

1.6 51

H62 Land off Highstone Lane, Worsbrough Common 0.5 18

H72 Land North of Kingwell Road, Worsborough 2.4 77



H73 Land between Mt. Vernon Road & Upper Sheffield Road, Worsborough

11.8 154

H83 Land to the East of Woolley Colliery Road, Darton 3.7 89

UB6 Land adjacent Zenith Business Park 5.7 182

290 Land south west of Priory Road 0.5 18

503 Land off Leighton Close 0.5 18

Total 2979

Cudworth

Site Reference

Site Size (ha.) Indicative Dwellings

AC22 Land off High Street, Shafton 1.3 0

AC23 Land off Pontefract Road 6.1 192

H10 Land West of Brierley Road, Grimethorpe, Barnsley 1.9 61

H22 Land North of Blacker Lane, Shafton 5 160

H32 Land adjacent Carrs Lane/Summerdale Road, Cudworth

11 278

H39 Land at Weetshaw Lane, Cudworth 4.5 144

H74 Land North of Sidcop Road, Cudworth 0.5 18

H75 Land off Cudworth Bypass 6 192

H76 Land West of Three Nooks Lane, Cudworth 1.27 41

H87 Land North of Oak Tree Avenue, Cudworth 1.2 38

897 Former Willowgarth School, Grimethorpe 4.6 0

Total 1124

Dearne Towns

Site Reference


AC26 Land south of Lowfield Road, Bolton on Dearne 2.7 86

H1 Former Reema Estate and adjoining land, off School Street, Thurnscoe, Rotherham

21.1 525

H12 Bolton House Farm, Barnsley Road, Goldthorpe, 9 194

H17 Land South of Barnburgh Lane, Goldthorpe 4.1 115

H30 Land North Of East Street, Goldthorpe 5.2 112

H50 Land to the North of the Dearne ALC, Goldthorpe 3.2 102

H51 Land North Of Barnburgh Lane, Goldthorpe 3.4 109

H52 Land South of Beever Street, Goldthorpe 6.2 54

H55 Land at Brunswick Street, Thurnscoe 1.4 45

H67 Land to the East of Broadwater Estate Bolton on Dearne

14.8 333

H84 Land South of Bridge Lane, Thurnscoe 14 308

311 Land south of King Street, Thurnscoe 0.7 25

372 Land off Gooseacre Avenue, Thurnscoe 2.51 67

496 Former Highgate Social Centre 1.2 29

Total 2104

Hoyland



Site Reference


AC29 Land off Shortwood Roundabout 2.7 86

AC30 Land at Tankersley Lane 3.5 118

AC31 Land at Broad Carr Road, Hoyland 4.1 131

H2 Land West Of Fitzwilliam Street, Elsecar 2.4 77

H4 Land South of Hey Green Lane, Birdwell (HOY14) 3.7 115

H6 Greenside Lane Hoyland, Barnsley 0.6 22

H7 Land Off Clough Fields Road, Hoyland, Barnsley 2.6 74

H8 Land Off Meadowfield Drive, Hoyland, Barnsley 2.3 74

H9 Land Of Welland Crescent, Elsecar, Barnsley 0.8 29

H16 Land North Of Hoyland Road, Hoyland Common 20.3 603

H45 Land north of Stead Lane, Hoyland 23.8 696

877 Land at Sheffield Road, Birdwell 0.8 29

Total 2054

Penistone

Site Reference


AC34 Land north of Barnsley Road, Penistone 1.5 48

H25 Land At Talbot Road, Penistone 2.1 30

H34 Land East Of Saunderson Avenue, Penistone 0.8 29

H47 Land South East Of Schole Hill Lane, Penistone 4.9 0

H81 Land South of Well House Lane, Penistone 4.2 132

H82 Land South of Halifax Road, Penistone 17.1 414

Total

653

Royston

Site Reference


H11 Land Off Lee Lane, Royston, Barnsley 35 770

H43 Land at end of Monkton Way, Royston 1.8 58

Total 828

Wombwell

Site Reference


AC39 Land at Pitt Street, Darfield 3.4 109

H3 Land to the South of Doncaster Road, Darfield 18 540

H40 Former Foulstone School Playing Fields, Darfield, 8.9 189

H41 Former Foulstone School, Darfield 2.4 77

H56 Land rear of Kings Oak Primary School, Wombwell 1.4 45

H63 Land off Newsome Avenue, Wombwell 1.2 0

H64 Former Kings Road School Site, Wombwell 0.8 29

H70 Land East of Lundhill Road, Wombwell 5.1 160

232 Land at Hill Street/ Snape Hill Road, Darfield 0.9 32



308 Land at New Street, Wombwell 1.1 35

377 Land east of Wortley Avenue, Wombwell 1 32

Total 1248

Outside Urban Barnsley and Principal Towns

Site Reference


AC44 Paper Mill, Oughtibridge 0

Proposed Mixed Use Sites

Site Reference


MU1 Land south of Barugh Green Road 1700

AC11 Land between Fish Dam Lane and Carlton Road, Carlton

294

AC12 Land off Shaw Lane, Carlton 1206

AC16

Total 3200

12.0 Small Sites Sites below 0.3ha, which is the threshold we have used for site allocations will make a

contribution to our housing supply. These will come forward as windfall sites. Figure 9 at Paragraph 5.3 of the SHELAA sets out that over the last decade, the average small sites windfall delivery has been 142 dwellings per year. This is equal to around 15% of total completions period between the 2006/2007 and 2015/2016 monitoring periods. Small sites could form part of brownfield register and may be suitable for development such as starter homes. The threshold for affordable housing has been maintained at 15 dwellings which will assist in supporting small sites in coming forward.

13.0 Previously Developed Land 13.1 The NPPF (paragraph 17 the Core Planning Principles) states that Planning policies

and decisions ‘should encourage the effective use of land by re-using land that has been previously developed (brownfield land), provided that it is not of high environmental value.’

13.2 This is a consideration when selecting land for allocation for housing in the Local Plan. 13.3 The table below shows the make-up of all the sites that have been considered through

the housing site selection process for this version of the Local Plan (including sites in the UDP green belt).

Proposed Sites Rejected Sites Total

Greenfield Sites 450.42 ha 1046 ha 1496.42

PDL Sites 67.03 ha 108.3 ha 175.33

13.4 This shows that the large majority of sites that are potentially available for development

are greenfield within the NPPF definition. It also demonstrates there is not enough previously developed land available that is suitable for allocation. Lists of the proposed



and rejected housing sites are contained in the Local Plan Examination Library. The link to the Examination Library webpage is https://www.barnsley.gov.uk/services/planning-and-buildings/local-planning-and-development/our-new-local-plan/local-plan-examination-2016-17/local-plan-examination-library/ The reference numbers of the lists are Proposed Housing Sites EB48 and Rejected Housing Sites EB51. Where a site or part of a site is previously developed this appendix gives the reason for rejection.

13.5 Overall these figures demonstrate the lack of suitable previously developed land that is

available in Barnsley. This is largely due to the economic history of the borough which was for many years concentrated on coal mining, much of our previously developed land (brownfield land) has since been restored to soft afteruses. More significantly, it is important to note that the last housing site allocations in the borough were made when the Unitary Development Plan was adopted in 2000. As the plan period ran until 2001 there have been no site allocations to accommodate objectively assessed housing need covering the 11 year period from 2002-2013. Despite this, during that period Barnsley experienced significant housing growth primarily from redevelopment of brownfield sites. Accordingly, it is unsurprising that there is so little previously developed land available within the borough to accommodate objectively assessed housing need to 2033.

13.6 The impact of a lack of housing allocations has been to reduce the amount of

employment land available within the borough. Allied with the release of new housing sites, it is important that land currently in active use for employment purposes is protected and that if this land becomes available for development it is considered for employment purposes before residential development can be considered. The borough still has many serious economic issues and land that is supporting jobs must be protected where possible.

13.7 As required by national policy the housing site selection methodology does give weight

to PDL sites but it is clear that if the borough is going to meet the housing requirement set out in the Local Plan there will need to be a considerable amount of greenfield land allocated for residential development, much of which lies in Green Belt.

13.8 A list of sites not allocated for residential development is available separate to this

background paper which lays out if a site is greenfield, PDL or a mixture of the two. 14.0 Economic context 14.1 It is important that all proposed site allocations that go forward through the Local Plan

process have a strong likelihood of being developed during the plan period. 14.2 Some viability related criteria such as market attractiveness of the site and its location

were included in the site selection process and detailed viability appraisals carried out. 14.3 In accordance with paragraphs 174 and 175 of the NPPF we have carried out a

detailed appraisal of the cumulative impacts of policy requirements to demonstrate that the plan is viable and deliverable. This is contained within the Local Plan Viability Study.

14.4 In formulating our trajectory, we have had regard to the economic impacts of delivering

jobs growth on the employment allocations. We recognise that the most attractive sites in the stronger sub markets will tend to come forward earlier in the plan period with sites elsewhere coming forward later in the plan period as we benefit from the






economic impacts identified in the Barnsley Local Plan Employment Land Evidence Report by Mott McDonald & Colliers.

14.5 We have also taken a pragmatic and flexible approach to density and affordable

housing requirements to ensure that development can come forward at all stages during the economic cycle and are not proposing to apply a CIL charge to new homes in the weakest sub markets.

15.0 Conclusions

15.1 The proposed housing requirement figure of 20,900 dwellings between 2014 and 2033,

although aspirational, is considered to be realistic and achievable.

15.2 The sites proposed for allocation are considered to be suitable and represent the best

options for delivering an appropriate mix to meet our overall housing needs.

15.3 The proposed allocations follow the proposed settlement hierarchy, which replicates

that approved through the adopted Core Strategy. This focusses growth in Urban

Barnsley and the Principal Towns. This does not necessarily mean there will be no

development in villages during the plan period. As set out in draft policy LG2 Location

of Growth, ‘Development will be allowed in villages if it is consistent with Green Belt

policy and is necessary for the viability of the settlement and to meet local needs’.

15.4 The Local Plan proposes a housing strategy which is sustainable and will meet the

requirements of NPPF and NPPG.





Extract of OAHN methodology common approach by Edge Analytics

Appendix 2 Appendix 2

Appendix 2 Appendix 2

Appendix 2

Appendix 1



Housing Site Selection Methodology Stage 1 The following criteria were assessed at this stage:

Criteria Topic Scoring Information Source

Transport

Availability of Rail and Bus Red site - (not in Core Public Transport Network buffer) 1 point Amber site (partly within Core Public Transport Network buffer and partly out) 3 points Green Site (within Core Public Transport Network walking distance buffer) 5 points

This information is provided by South Yorkshire Passenger Transport Executive.

Potential for the site to accessed by public transport

The site gets one point per ability to meet these criteria: Site within 2km of existing railway station (shuttle bus): 1 point Site 1km from existing bus route (potential for amended route: 1 point Site within 800m of railway line (potential for new railway station): 1 point

This criterion is assessed using geographical information system software (GIS) to ascertain which criteria are met.

Proximity to strategic highway network Site is within 0.8km of strategic road network: 5 points Site is over 0.8 1.6km from strategic road network: 3 points Site is over 1.6km from strategic road network: 1 point

This criterion is assessed using GIS to ascertain which radii the site falls within.

Proximity to Services

Proximity to key services Site has all essential facilities plus five other services: 5 points Site has all essential facilities within 800 m: 3 points Site has two or less essential facilities (800m): 1 point

This criterion is assessed using GIS to ascertain which essential and other facilities lay in proximity to the site. Please see appendix 1 for more information on what types of facilities are considered in assessing this criterion.

Appendix 2




Proximity to Town Centres 0.8km of a town, district of local centre: 5 points Site is less than Site is less than 0.8km - 1.6km of a town, district of local centre: 3 point Site is over 1.6km from a town, district of local centre: 1 points


Efficient Use of Land

Soil Quality Loss of grade 1 or 2 agricultural land: 1 points Loss of grade 3 - 5 agricultural land: 3 point No loss of agricultural land: 5 point

This criterion is assessed using GIS to ascertain which grade of agricultural land is affected if any.

Land Type Greenfield: 1 point A mix of PDL and Greenfield: 3 points PDL: 5 points

This criterion is assessed using information gathered as part of the production of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA). If a site was not included in the 2012 SHLAA this criteria was assessed by officers.

Relationship to existing settlement area site is significantly detached from existing settlement area: 1 point site is bordered by at least one side by existing housing/settlement area: 3 point site is completely within existing housing/settlement area: 5 point

This criterion was assessed by officers using aerial photography and site visits as necessary.

Environment

Impact on Conservation Areas Site is within conservation area: 1 points Site is adjacent to (within 20m): 3 point Site not within 20m of conservation area: 5 point.


Impact of Listed Buildings Site within 100m of a listed building: 1 point Site not within 100m of a listed buildings: 3 point





Impact on Registered Park and Gardens Site within 500m of a registered park and garden: 1 point Site not within 500m of a registered park and garden: 3 point


Flood Risk Site within Flood Zone 3a: excluded at beginning of assessment. Site within Flood Zone 2: 1 point Site within Flood Zone 1: 3 point

This criterion is assessed using GIS to ascertain which zone the site falls within.

AQMA Site within or 200m of AQMA: 1 point Site 200m to 800m from AQMA: 3 point Site not within 800m of AQMA: 5 points


Physical Problems of Limitations

Access Infrastructure Extensive new access infrastructure required: 1 point Some new access infrastructure required: 3 points Extensive new access infrastructure not required: 5 Points

This criterion is assessed using information gathered as part of the production of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which involved consultations with the Councils Highways Development Control officers. If a site was not included in the 2012 SHLAA Highways DC officers were consulted as a separate exercise.

Drainage infrastructure Extensive new drainage infrastructure required: 1 point Some new access infrastructure required: 3 points Extensive new drainage infrastructure not required: 5 Point

This criterion is assessed using information gathered as part of the production of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which involved consultations with the Councils drainage officers. If a site was not included in the 2012




SHLAA drainage officers were consulted as a separate exercise.

Ground condition Treatment/remediation expected to be required: 1 point Treatment/remediation expected to be required on part of the site: 3 points Treatment/remediation not expected to be required on majority of site: 5 point

This criterion is assessed using information gathered as part of the production of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which involved consultations with relevant Council officers. If a site was not included in the 2012 SHLAA officers were consulted as a separate exercise.

Geo-cavities Site within area likely to contain geological constraints of mining cavities: 1 point Site not within area likely to contain geological constraints or mining cavities: 3 point

This criterion is assessed using information gathered as part of the production of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which involved consultations with relevant Council officers. If a site was not included in the 2012 SHLAA relevant officers were consulted as a separate exercise.

Bad neighbours Major bad neighbour constraints which are difficult to remedy/overcome: 1 point Bad neighbour constraints, but potential for mitigation: 3 point No bad neighbour constraints: 5 point

This criterion is assessed using information gathered as part of the production of the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which involved consultations with relevant Council officers. If a site was not included in the 2012




SHLAA officers assessed this criterion using site visits.



Housing Site Selection Methodology Stage 2 Stage 2 builds upon the work done in Stage 1. All scores from stage 1 are carried across to stage 2. As all the stage 1 criteria relate to site suitability these scores are included as part of the score for suitability at stage 2. The overall scoring is explained in more detail below. Stage 2 provides an opportunity for technical assessments not considered as part of the SHLAA to be included in the evidenced assessment of site suitability.


AVAILABILITY

Ownership Information

Evidence Owner is willing to develop the site

Owner known and firm confirmation received they are willing to develop site: 5 points Agent proposed site, willingness of owner unconfirmed: 3 points Owner unknown or complex multiple ownership: 1 point Owner unwilling to develop site: 0 points

Council records are used to assess this criterion. This includes information received as part of:

SHLAA consultations

DPD consultations (for example the Development Sites & Places DPD)

Five year housing supply questionnaires and enquiries

SUITABILITY

Biodiversity

Impact of biodiversity on suitability for development

No detrimental local ecological impact: 5 points Some adverse local ecological impact but scope for mitigation: 3 points Very detrimental ecological impact: 1 point

This criterion is scored using ecological site assessments produced by specialist consultants for the Council.

Greenspace

Greenspace Not on an identified greenspace: 5 points On a greenspace where its loss would not result in deficiency: 3 points On a greenspace where loss would result in deficiency: 1 point

The methodology used to assess and score this criterion can be found at appendix 2.

Landscape Sensitivity

Appendix 3




Landscape sensitivity is a judgement about the degree to which a landscape character area can accommodate change without adverse effects on its character.

Low landscape sensitivity: 5 points Medium landscape sensitivity: 3 points High landscape sensitivity: 1 points

This criterion is scored based on the conclusions of the Boroughs Landscape Character Assessment about the sensitivity of the character area in which a site lies.

Landscape Capacity

Landscape capacity is a judgement about the amount of development that can be accommodated.

High landscape capacity: 5 points Medium landscape capacity: 3 points Low landscape capacity: 1 points No landscape capacity: 0 points

This criterion is scored based on the conclusions of the Boroughs Landscape Character Assessment about the capacity of the character area in which a site lies.

ACHIEVABILITY

Market Attractiveness

Impact of market attractiveness on likelihood of development

Highly attractive area: 5 points Moderately attractive area: 3 points Low attractiveness areas: 1 points

This criterion is assessed using evidence on market attractiveness laid out in the ‘Residential Market Commentary Paper’ which was produced as part of the borough’s 2012 SHLAA. This uses information from the Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) and primary research undertaken as part of the SHLAA to assign sub- areas across the borough based on their attractiveness to the market in terms of residential development.

Viability




Viability Site is financially viable and generates a positive residual value at or about the market rate: 5 points Site is viable but generates a positive residual value below the market rate: 3 points Site is marginally viable i.e. it neither generates a positive or negative residual value. Or site is unviable and generates a negative residual value: 1 point

This criterion is assessed from work undertaken by officers on the viability of potential sites. From this a score was assigned for inclusion in the HSSM process.

The site assessment was weighted equally between the three elements of suitability, availability and achievability. There were 23 suitability criteria (including those carried forward from Stage 1), 2 achievability criteria and 1 availability criterion. The total achievability score was therefore multiplied by 11.5 and the availability score by 23, to provide the balance across the three elements.



Essential and Other Facilities The criterion ‘Proximity to Key Services’ is assessed using the following requirements:

Essential Facilities

Primary school Doctors practise*

Local convenience store – any shop selling at least a small range of everyday essential items

Public open green space – generally urban green space identified in the green space register (excluding allotments).

*Where a LIFT centre has opened in a settlement that has led to a reduction in the number of local doctors practises due to relocation there we will take this into account when assessing a site’s access to services.

Other Services / Facilities

Secondary school Job centre Post office

Benefit agency Place of Worship Petrol station

Retail (shopping parade) Tertiary College Village / Community Hall

Public house Banking facility Library

Hospital Sports centre Chemist

Health Centre / Clinic – Providing a range of health related community services such as district nursing, chiropody, occupational therapy etc.

Supermarket – Self-service store selling mainly food, or food and non-food goods, often with car parking.

Appendix 4


50

HSSM Sites Assessment Forms Stage 1

Housing Site Selection Methodology

Site Name: Site Reference:

Criteria Topic Criteria

Transport

Availability of Rail and Bus

Red site - (not in buffer) 1 point Amber site (partly within buffer and partly out) 3 points Green Site (within walking distance buffer) 5 points

Potential for the site to accessed by public transport

The site gets one point per ability to meet these criteria: Site within 2km of existing railway station (shuttle bus): 1 point Site 1km from existing bus route (potential for amended route: 1 point Site within 800m of railway line (potential for new railway station): 1 point

Proximity to strategic highway network

Site is within 0.8km of strategic road network: 5 points Site is over 0.8 1.6km from strategic road network: 3 points Site is over 1.6km from strategic road network: 1 point

Proximity to Services

Proximity to key services

Sites has all essential facilities plus five other services: 5 points Sites has all essential facilities within 800 m: 3 points Site has two or less essential facilities (800m): 1 point

Proximity to Town Centres

0.8km of a town, district of local centre: 5 points Site is less than Site is less than 0.8km - 1.6km of a town, district of local centre: 3 point Site is over 1.6km from a town, district of local centre: 1 points

Efficient Use of Land

Soil Quality Loss of grade 1 or 2 agricultural land: 1 points Loss of grade 3 - 5 agricultural land: 3 point No loss of agricultural land: 5 point

Land Type Greenfield: 1 point A mix of PDL and Greenfield: 3 points PDL: 5 points

Relationship to existing settlement area

site is significantly detached from existing settlement area: 1 point site is bordered by at least one side by existing housing/settlement area: 3 point site is completely within existing housing/settlement area: 5 point

Environment

Appendix 5


51

Impact on Conservation Areas

Site is within conservation area: 1 points Site is adjacent to (within 20m): 3 point Site not within 20m of conservation area: 5 point.

Impact of Listed Buildings

Site within 100m of a listed building: 1 point Site not within 100m of a listed buildings: 3 point

Impact on Registered Park and Gardens

Site within 500m of a registered park and garden: 1 point Site not within 500m of a registered park and garden: 3 point

Flood Risk Site within Flood Zone 3a: excluded at beginning of assessment. Site within Flood Zone 2: 1 point Site within Flood Zone 1: 3 point

AQMA Site within or 200m of AQMA: 1 point Site 200m to 800m from AQMA: 3 point Site not within 800m of AQMA: 5 points

Physical Problems of Limitations

Access Infrastructure Extensive new access infrastructure required: 1 point Some new access infrastructure reguired: 3 points Extensive new access infrastructure not required: 5 Points

Drainage infrastructure Extensive new drainage infrastructure required: 1 point Some new access infrastructure reguired: 3 points Extensive new drainage infrastructure not required: 5 Point

Ground condition Treatment/remediation expected to be required: 1 point Treatment/remediation expected to be required on part of the site: 3 points Treatment/remediation not expected to be required on majority of site: 5 point

Geo-cavities Site within area likely to contain geological constraints of mining cavities: 1 point Site not within area likely to contain geological constraints or mining cavities: 3 point

Bad neighbours Major bad neighbour constraints which are difficult to remedy/overcome: 1 point Bad neighbour constraints, but potential for mitigation: 3 point No bad neighbour constraints: 5 point

Stage 2

Site Name:

Site Ref:

Criteria Topic Criteria

AVAILABILITY

Ownership Information

Evidence Owner is willing to develop the site

Owner known and firm confirmation received they are willing to develop site: 5 points Agent proposed site,


52

willingness of owner unconfirmed: 3 points Owner unknown or complex multiple ownership: 1 point Owner unwilling to develop site: 0 points

Total Score: Availability

Total Score: Availability (Factor Value x 22)

SUITABILITY

Biodiveristy

Impact of biodiversity on suitability for development

No detrimental local ecological impact: 5 points Some adverse local ecological impact but scope for mitigation: 3 points Very detrimental ecological impact: 1 point

Greenspace

Greenspace Not on an identified greenspace: 5 points On a greenspace where its loss would not result in deficiency: 3 points On a greenspace where loss would result in deficiency: 1 point

Landscape Sensitivity

Landscape sensitivity is a judgement about the degree to which a landscape character area can accommodate change without adverse effects on its character.

Low landscape sensitivity: 5 points Medium landscape sensitivity: 3 points High landscape sensitivity: 1 points

Landscape Capacity

Landscape capacity is a judgement about the amount of development that can be accommodated.

High landscape capacity: 5 points Medium landscape capacity: 3 points Low landscape capacity: 1 points No landscape capacity: 0 points

Total Score: Stage 1

Total Score Stage 2

Total Score: Suitability

ACHIEVABILITY

Market


53

Attractiveness

Impact of market attractiveness on likelihood of development

Highly attractive area: 5 points Moderately attractive area: 3 points Low attractiveness areas: 1 points

Viability

Viability Site is financially viable and generates a positive residual value at or about the market rate: 5 points Site is viable but generates a positive residual value below the market rate: 3 points Site is marginally viable i.e. it neither generates a positive or negative residual value. Or site is unviable and generates a negative residual value: 1 point

Total Score: Achievability

Total Score: Achievability (Factor x 12)

TOTAL SCORE


54

Heritage Impact Assessment Barnsley Local Plan 2015/2016

1. Introduction 1.1 The Local Plan contains the borough’s strategy to deliver sustainable development through the

planning system. It includes a strategy for the allocation of land to provide for up to 20,900 additional dwellings and 309.4 ha of Employment land during the course of the plan period. The purpose of this Heritage Impact Assessment is to support the Local Plan by demonstrating how the historic environment has been considered in the site selection process and to assess the likely impact on heritage assets, both designated and undesignated; and whether or how, any harm can be avoided where possible and if this is not avoided, mitigated.

2. Barnsley and its Heritage Assets 2.1 The borough has a rich archaeological potential, including evidence of early prehistoric activity

and settlement evidence, which is well-preserved under the peat on the Pennines to the west. Evidence of later prehistoric and Roman period farms and fields systems still survive as buried features that may be visible as cropmarks on the lower lying land to the east within the Dearne. From the medieval period onwards, standing structures such the remains of Monk Bretton Priory, as well as parish churches and timber-framed farm buildings, still in use, record the development of the landscape that we occupy today.

2.2 The growth of industry within that landscape in the post-medieval period is shown in records

for glass and pottery production, for example at Bolsterstone, as well as for linen production, such as remains of a former bleachery at Cudworth; alongside these industries, there is evidence for the metal trades, such as iron working – including a 17th century blast furnace at Rockley, and the long-lived nail-making industry, which continued in places such as at Hoylandswaine, well into the 19th century. Extensive evidence for mining within the borough ranges from individual shafts, to standing structures associated with later deep mining such as the remains at Hemingfield Colliery; the changes in transportation methods to allow movement of materials to markets across the country from these works and mines are recorded in linear monuments for tramways, canals and railways, all of which can be seen in the landscape around the preserved workshops of the Elsecar Iron Works and Colliery.

2.3 In all, the borough has 671 listed buildings, 5 nationally registered Historic Parks and Gardens

and 23 designated scheduled monuments. The South Yorkshire Sites and Monuments Record holds records of approximately 1000 archaeological finds and monuments and a variety of undesignated assets in the Barnsley area. The variety of historic areas settlements and villages is reflected in its 18 conservation areas.

2.4This historic environment is central to the character and identity of the borough and is a source of immense local pride, as well as being a valuable educational and economic resource. It also adds significantly to the positive image of Barnsley. The aspiration is that as part of sustainable development it can reinforce local identity and play a part in increasing the appeal of the area as a place to live, work, visit and invest in. In achieving this, the challenge is to ensure that the significance of the heritage assets which makes up the historic environment is retained for the future.

3. National Planning Policy and Legislation

3.1 The rich history of Barnsley and the conservation of its many heritage assets means there is the potential for conflict with sites that are proposed for future development within the Plan. This therefore requires consideration of relevant factors during the sites allocation process so as to avoid harm wherever possible and if not to mitigate that harm.

Appendix 6


55

3.2 Decisions on the allocation of sites by a local authority that have the potential to impact

designated or equally significant heritage assets (including their setting) must address statutory considerations and satisfy the relevant policies of the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

3.3 The statutory duties placed on local authorities are outlined in the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990. This Act includes a requirement to have special regard to the desirability of preserving a listed building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. For conservation areas, a local planning authority must pay special attention to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of that area.

3.4 National planning policy, set out in the NPPF (Paragraph 126) states that local planning authorities should set out a positive strategy in their local plans for the conservation and enjoyment of the historic environment including heritage assets most at risk through neglect, decay or other threats.

3.5 The NPPF requires that planning authorities deliver sustainable development by ensuring that policies and decisions concerning the historic environment; • recognise that heritage assets are a non-renewable resource; • ensure decisions are based on a proper understanding of the significance of heritage

assets likely to be affected; • ensure the historic environment is integrated into planning policies. Guidance published to support the NPPF and the planning system advises that significance should be identified at an early stage using evidence and expertise and advises identifying areas of potential non-designated heritage assets with archaeological interest.

4. Historic England Guidance

4.1 Historic England advice on site selection methodology relates to a need to demonstrate that the sites likely to go forward as allocations must be compatible with the requirements of the NPPF (and, where relevant, the Duties under the 1990 Act). As such, an assessment of the likely impact of a proposed site on the historic environment needs to be undertaken in order to demonstrate soundness. Historic England suggests that the Council undertake a Heritage Impact Assessment of all the sites likely to go forwards for allocation, in order to properly identify any impacts on Barnsley’s heritage assets.

4.2 This assessment needs to evaluate:- • The contribution the site makes to the significance of heritage assets in its vicinity. • What impact the development of the site might have on the elements which contribute to their significance. • If allocation and future development results in harm, what measures will be required to mitigate that harm. • If, despite these mitigation measures, the development is still likely to harm the significance of a heritage asset, what public benefits are derived that outweigh the harm? If harm is not outweighed by the public benefits, then the site should not be allocated. • If there is potential for an allocation to enhance or better reveal the significance of a heritage asset.


56

4.3 Historic England’s recent Guidance “The Historic Environment and Site Allocations in Local Plans” (October 2015) outlines an approach to this which is the approach which will be followed in this impact assessment.

5. Purpose and scope of the Heritage Impact Assessment

5.1 This Heritage Impact Assessment seeks to assess how the significance of any heritage assets affected by a potential allocation has been considered in the site selection process and to assess the likely impact on heritage assets, (both designated and non-designated) and whether any harm can be mitigated. In doing so it is intended to be both a positive strategy and significance led as required by the NPPF and recommended in Historic England guidance.

5.2 The following types of assets are considered in this assessment:

Designated assets including statutorily listed buildings, scheduled monuments, registered historic parks and gardens, and conservation areas.

Non-designated assets where heritage significance is shown to be equal to that of statutory designated assets.

5.3 The heritage impact assessment of proposed site allocations (minus archaeology) was undertaken by the council’s Conservation Officer. The archaeological component of the heritage resource in Barnsley was assessed separately by Wessex Archaeology on behalf of BMBC in the Scoping Review carried out in May 2015, and revisited again in March 2016. In assessing the impact of any allocation on undesignated archaeological remains the council needed to utilise specialist archaeological expertise and this is covered in the two documents:

Barnsley Local Plan, Proposed Allocation Sites Assessment (May 2015)

Barnsley Local Plan, Proposed Allocation Sites Assessment – Round 2 (March 2016)

5.4 Potential impacts on designated, significant undesignated and archaeological heritage assets were combined and used to highlight heritage considerations of a proposed site allocation and to indicate how any impact could be avoided or mitigated. It also sought to identify opportunities through site allocation for finding viable uses for heritage assets or whether there are other public benefits which might outweigh any harm to significance.

6. Evidence Base

6.1 The sources used in compiling the evidence base included:

List descriptions for nationally listed heritage assets (The National Heritage List for England (listed buildings, scheduled monuments, and parks and gardens of national significance)).

Conservation area maps, appraisals and summaries

South Yorkshire Sites and Monuments Record.

Archaeology Scoping Study of Site Allocations (2015 and 2016)

South Yorkshire Historic Environment Characterisation (SYHEC)

6.2 In addition, the council’s Conservation Officer had regard for any relevant additional sources of information revealed as part of the planning process (e.g. heritage statements). General local knowledge of the sites and areas and site visits helped greatly to inform the decision making process.

7. Methodology


57

7.1 The methodology for the heritage impact assessment of the proposed sites is based on an

approach which broadly follows the 5 steps outlined in advice note 3 “The Historic Environment and Site Allocations in Local Plans” site selection methodology”. These are summarised as follows; Step 1: Identify which heritage assets are affected by the potential site allocation. Step 2: Understand what contribution the site (in its current form) makes to the significance of the heritage asset(s) including site visit if necessary. Step 3: Identify what impact the allocation might have on that significance, Step 4: Consider maximising enhancements and avoiding harm Step 5: Determine whether the proposed site allocation is appropriate in light of the NPPF’s tests of soundness

7.2 Step 1: Identifying Heritage Assets affected. The presence of any designated heritage assets within the site area was identified through GIS mapping layers. None of the proposed allocation areas directly include any designated heritage assets. However, a number of sites do have archaeological potential that although undesignated have a demonstrably equal significance to other designated assets. This potential and impact is detailed within the 2015 and 2016 Scoping Reviews by Wessex Archaeology. Additionally, a number of sites are located either adjacent to or have the potential to impact upon the setting of designated assets*. Likely impacts on setting followed an initial identification by:

An initial 100m proximity sweep from any point of the proposed allocation site boundary.

A further 800m (approx. half mile) sweep from any point of the proposed allocation boundary.

Local knowledge of Authority Officers was used where elements of longer distance setting were likely to be impacted beyond the basic distance / proximity measures above. This was particularly relevant where larger allocation sites were proposed or where landform increased the potential for intrusion into a setting (hilltop or valley locations for example).

Detailed workshops were undertaken looking at each proposed allocation site likely to move forwards and the potential impacts on heritage assets or their setting.

Where no heritage assets were deemed to be affected the assessment proceeded directly to stage 5.

7.3 Step 2: Contribution of the site to the significance of the heritage assets. Understanding significance is essential in order to be able to assess the potential impact of any development. The Historic England document “Conservation Principles: Policies and Guidance for the Sustainable Management of the Historic Environment” (2008) provides a


58

useful basis for articulating significance which is based on how a heritage asset or place is valued by this and future generations because of its heritage interest. This may derive from an asset’s:

・Evidential value: potential to yield evidence about past human activity

・Historical value: connection with a notable person or event

・Aesthetic value: design and appearance

・Communal value: connection with any current or past community

The allocations guidance suggests that understanding significance should be ‘in a proportionate manner’ based on the complexity of the site or the nature of the heritage asset. If the site makes little or no contribution to the significance of an asset the assessment proceeded directly to stage 5.

7.4 Step 3: Likely impact of allocation on heritage significance. This stage required an assessment of how the extent, location, siting, form, appearance, or other impacts might affect the significance of the heritage asset (including its setting). If an impact is deemed likely, the degree (or lack of) harm needed to be assessed in line with;

No harm

Some harm

Substantial harm

7.5 Step 4: Heritage Constraints and Opportunities: Any means of avoiding harm or opportunities for enhancement needed to be identified as part of this step. For example, harm might be minimised through constraints on the site boundary, the location, density, height, form, materials, or through retaining key views depending on the nature and significance of the affected heritage asset. This stage also required that opportunities for enhancement or to better reveal significance were identified. For example, enhancement might be possible via consolidations of historic character or street scene, or by the use of particular forms, details or materials in adjacent development (setting considerations). If some potential harm to the heritage asset(s) was identified as a result of the site’s allocation, mitigation measures or opportunities for enhancement to offset this harm were identified in order to make a balanced judgement in the next step.

7.6 Step 5: Recommendation: The final assessment involved a brief summary balancing the degree of harm (if present) against constraints and opportunities. The assessment concluded with a judgement on the suitability of site for allocation as follows;

No adverse Impact / Little or no archaeological objections.


59

Adverse Impact or potential archaeological objection that might be mitigated and justified by constraints (on the allocation site) or by enhancement (site policy).

Adverse Impact or major archaeological objection resulting in substantial harm that is not balanced or justified and that may not be possible to mitigate.

The recommendation for each site is recorded with the Local Plan Publication 2016 Proposed Allocations table / worksheet. This includes a combined assessment and recommendation covering archaeology, designated and undesignated heritage assets. The detail of the significance and the impact on archaeological heritage assets is to be found within the 2015 and 2016 Scoping Reviews by Wessex Archaeology. Additionally a further level of assessment on the suitability for allocation in terms of the archaeological resource includes an amber / green assessment (amber / green stripe with the Wessex Archaeology Scoping Review). This extra level relates to uncertain archaeological objections where there is an unknown level of risk relating to archaeology. Interpretation of the Wessex Archaeology recommendation and mitigation (including any detailed site policies) were provided in consultation with the South Yorkshire Archaeology Service. * The majority of designated assets are identified and referred to either by name or by the seven digit reference number allocated by Historic England (the list number e.g. – 1151149).


60

Appendix 7 The Local Plan Housing Trajectory is available on the website as a separate document ‘Appendix 7 Local Plan Publication Housing Trajectory’ https://www2.barnsley.gov.uk/media/3878077/appendix_to_housing_background_paper.pdf

https://www2.barnsley.gov.uk/media/3878077/appendix_to_housing_background_paper.pdf


61

Appendix 8 Vacant Dwellings The number of vacant dwellings in the borough has been in a general decline since a peak of 4784 in 2008. This trend reflects the national trend. By 2015 the number of vacant dwellings had fallen to 2987. There are a number of possible causes for this fall.

Increase in dwellings being let in the private sector

Household growth outstripping dwelling stock growth

Changes in council tax which penalised vacant properties

Government / Council action to bring back empty dwellings to use

What is difficult to estimate is the effect of the general housing market on vacancies. Vacancy levels rose between 2004 and 2008, when house sales and prices were rising. Levels have fallen every year from 2008 to 2015 despite an increase in sales and prices 2013-2015. What is hard to predict is how long this trend could continue without causing problems to the property market. The Regional Spatial Strategy set a target of 3.5%. The Barnsley vacancy rate in 2015 was 2.8% and is now well below the 2004 figure, having peaked at 4.7% in 2008. Looking at the UK market Couch and Cocks (2012:503) conjectured that a 2.5% vacancy rate would be a ‘natural level’ of vacancy.3 Couch, C and Cocks, M (2013) ‘Housing Vacancy and the Shrinking City: Trends and Policies in the UK and the City of Liverpool’ Housing Studies 2013 Vol 28 No3

Barnsley has one of the lowest vacancy rates in the Las in the region, outside North Yorkshire.

Vacants 2015 Stock 2015

Vacant Rate

Craven 1,007

155,800 0.6

Ryedale 709

87,210 0.8

York UA 844

87,210 1.0

Hambleton 1,226 1.0

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Vacant Dwellings in Barnsley

All

Long term


62

118,150

Richmondshire 855

75,070 1.1

Selby 932

37,660 2.5

Sheffield 6,092

240,690 2.5

Barnsley 2,987

107,830 2.8

Rotherham 3,265

114,320 2.9

Wakefield 4,327

149,690 2.9

Kirklees 5,365

184,190 2.9

Leeds 10,135

339,520 3.0

East Riding of Yorkshire UA 4,693

155,800 3.0

Harrogate 2,300

73,890 3.1

North Lincolnshire UA 2,341

75,070 3.1

Doncaster 4,386

133,040 3.3

Scarborough 2,241

57,540 3.9

Calderdale 3,731

93,930 4.0

Hull 4,995

118,150 4.2

North East Lincolnshire UA 3,133

73,890 4.2

Bradford 9,277

210,730 4.4

Region 74,841 2,689,380 2.8

Other areas have used vacancies in their Local Plans. Sheffield Adjustment for Reduction in the Number of Vacant Dwellings 2.10 The RSS made no allowance for a reduction in the number of vacant dwellings when the housing requirement was calculated . However, the latest monitoring suggests that the number of long-term empty properties is expected to fall by 1,488 dwellings3 during the period covered by the Local Plan. This would reduce the net requirement for new homes over the Local Plan period to 28,262 dwellings. London In addition the annual housing target in the London Plan includes vacant properties returning to use. Between 2004 and 2011 a yearly average of 95 vacant units were brought back into use in Brent. DCLG figures indicate in 2013 there were 567 long term vacant dwellings in Brent. This data was informed by several sources of data including council tax base and Local Authority Housing Statists return. Based on previous levels it is considered these vacancies


63

could be brought back into use over a 10 year period. This would equate to an average of 56 dwellings per annum. Taking the combined windfall and empty homes allowance into account, an assumed delivery of 320 dwellings per annum has been taken from these sources. Future Windfalls There is strong evidence that significant windfall development will come forward throughout the Local Plan period. The UDP was adopted in 2000, in 2002/03 allocated sites provided 46.4% of housing delivery, while non allocated PDL sites provided 41%, by 2004/05 windfalls (defined as all unallocated PDL) were providing more of the supply than allocated sites, just 5 years into the UDP period.

Allocated Sites

PDL non allocated %

2002/03 46.4 41.0

2003/04 42.4 39.9

2004/05 28.1 58.0

2005/06 22.5 56.2

2006/07 21.1 67.8

2007/08 12.8 76.0

2008/09 8.2 85.1

2009/10 4.7 89.5

2010/11 11.0 84.2

2011/12 14.3 78.7

2012/13 19.4 74.7

2013/14 14.9 73.8

2014/15 9.9 69.3

2015/16 6.6 80.2

Total 20.1 68.1 Industry and residential land were the main sources of these windfalls. However these sources no longer provide the same volumes of available land, as large scale dwelling clearances have ceased and policy changes mean that industrial land is no longer being released for housing at the same rate. Remaining vacant education sites are now allocated sites though this does not exclude some educational land providing dwellings in future. Future flat / apartment development will almost all be windfall. The table below shows windfalls granted over the last 4 years with former land use.

2012/13 2013/14 2014/15 2015/16

Defence Land and Buildings 0 0 0 1

Derelict Land 14 3 4 188

Educational Buildings 174 67 2 3

Indoor Recreation 43 56 39 48

Industry 113 9 6 2 Institutional and Communal Accommodation 17 6 6 13

Institutional Buildings 36 47 10 10

Mineral Working or Quarry 0 0 0 0

Offices 7 17 47 60

Outdoor Recreation 0 0 0 0

Public Car Park 1 12 0 0


64

Railway 0 0 0 0

Religious Buildings 1 6 5 3

Residential 63 55 71 41

Retailing 8 9 9 3

Road 0 0 0 0

Storage and Warehousing 0 31 16 13

Utilities 0 0 0 0

Vacant Buildings 0 1 5 0

Vacant Land Previously Developed 13 3 3 4

Grand Total 53 34 26 23

543 356 249 412

Even allowing for a decline in number of windfalls directly after the Local Plan is adopted there is evidence that a strong supply of windfalls will continue throughout the plan period. Lapsed Rates Lapsed rates pre financial crisis averaged 3.1%. This rose to 28.8% before declining again.

year granted Lapsed Units Dwellings granted Lapsed

2002/03 27 2378 1.1

2003/04 78 3514 2.2

2004/05 183 3140 5.8

2005/06 62 2275 2.7

2006/07 442 4396 10.1

2007/08 648 3369 19.2

2008/09 396 1373 28.8

2009/10 55 2216 2.5

2010/11 208 1737 12.0

2011/12 145 1527 9.5

2012/13 136 999 13.6

Permitted Development

Query5

SumOfProposedUnits year granted

1 2013/14

1 2014/15

60 2015/16


65


66

Appendix 9

Densities The following tables illustrate densities that have been achieved in Barnsley in recent years. Table A shows densities achieved before the Core Strategy was adopted in 2011. Table B shows densities achieved after the Core Strategy Policy CSP 14was implemented. The text in the body of the background paper that discusses these tables is at paragraph 8.19. Table A Pre-Core Strategy Densities

Application Reference

Location Core

Strategy Settlement

Total Dwellings

Date PP Granted

Status Total Site

Area (Hectares)

Net Area Gross

Density Net

Density

2004/1740 College Fields

Urban Barnsley

227 23/12/2003 Completed 6.63 5.30 34.2 42.8

2002/1781 + 2004/2423

Springfield Street

Urban Barnsley

132 28/01/2004 Completed 2.73 2.18 48.4 60.4

2003/1530

Doncaster Road

Urban Barnsley

100 19/03/2004 Completed 3.44 2.75 29.1 36.4

2004/0064 + 2005/1370 + 2006/1503

Doncaster Road

Urban Barnsley

165 07/10/2004 Completed 3.22 2.57 51.3 64.1

2004/1828 Stocks Lane

Urban Barnsley

41 10/05/2005 Completed 0.52 0.47 79.3 88.1

2005/0544 Station Road

Urban Barnsley

67 18/05/2005 Completed 2.93 2.35 22.8 28.5

2005/0200

Doncaster Road

Urban Barnsley

43 13/10/2005 Completed 1.13 0.90 38.2 47.8


67

2005/0307 + 2010/0783

Burton Road Urban Barnsley

244 21/04/2006 Completed 7.43 5.94 32.8 41.0

2006/1384

Pontefract Road

Urban Barnsley

63 15/09/2006 Completed 0.70 0.63 89.6 99.6

2004/2377 + 2014/1191

Carlton Road Urban Barnsley

70 25/10/2006 Under construction

3.45 2.76 20.3 25.4

2006/1986 + 2009/0936

St Helens Urban Barnsley

72 04/05/2007 Completed 1.77 1.41 40.7 50.9

2006/1859 St Helen's Way

Urban Barnsley

54 25/10/2007 Completed 1.25 1.00 43.3 54.1

2009/1287 Leslie Road

Urban Barnsley

100 04/01/2010 Completed 2.06 1.65 48.5 60.7

2009/1549 Burntwood Rd Cudworth 106 10/03/2010 Completed 2.10 1.68 50.4 63.0

2008/0407 + 2011/0244

Longcar Urban Barnsley

67 23/03/2010 Completed 1.43 1.14 46.8 58.5

2010/1013

Yorkshire Traction

Urban Barnsley

204 09/11/2010 Completed 6.36 5.09 32.1 40.1

2002/1275 + 2002/1714 + 2004/0013 + 2004/0865

Station Road Goldthorpe 148 22/10/2002 Completed 4.20 3.36 35.2 44.0

2003/1183 + 2004/0331

Carr Head Lane

Goldthorpe 78 07/11/2003 Completed 1.83 1.46 42.6 53.3


68

2004/2330 + 2004/2330

Goldthorpe Colliery

Goldthorpe 338 19/10/2005 Under Construction

9.95 7.96 34.0 42.5

2006/1779 Ladycroft Goldthorpe 34 08/05/2007 Completed 0.88 0.79 38.6 42.9

2004/1496

Cemetery Road

Hoyland 61 10/02/2005 Completed 1.44 1.15 42.3 52.8

2005/0608 Roebuck Hill Hoyland 116 12/04/2006 Completed 3.77 3.02 30.8 38.5

2001/1527 Sheffield Road Penistone 51 07/02/2003 Completed 1.72 1.37 29.7 37.2

2003/0315 Green Road Penistone 62 06/05/2003 Completed 2.22 1.77 28.0 35.0

2006/1423 + 2007/0272 + 2012/0028

Former Hi-tech Foundry

Penistone 213 28/09/2006 Completed 5.87 4.70 36.3 45.4

2006/1860 + 2007/1845 + 2008/0067 + 2010/0897

Green Road Penistone 153 31/08/2007 Completed 4.07 3.25 37.6 47.0

H0390 Station Road Wombwell 60 01/09/2000 Completed 2.07 1.66 29.0 36.2

2001/1332 + 2002/1067

Edward Street Wombwell 192 22/02/2002 Under Construction

4.50 3.60 42.7 53.4

2002/1556 + 2004/1168 + 2004/1932

Hope Street Wombwell 94 17/01/2003 Completed 2.43 1.95 38.6 48.3

2003/1164 Ings Road Wombwell 59 05/02/2004 Completed 1.65 1.32 35.8 44.7

2004/0487 +

Ponterfact Road

Wombwell 216 24/08/2004 Completed 5.79 4.63 37.3 46.6


69

2009/1001

2004/1311 Hawson Street Wombwell 58 30/11/2004 Completed 1.72 1.38 33.7 42.2

2007/2073 Verona Rise Wombwell 42 03/03/2008 Completed 0.99 0.89 42.5 47.2

2009/1039 + 2010/0130

Park Street Wombwell 74 02/11/2009 Completed 1.66 1.33 44.6 55.8

2006/1525 + 2007/0268 + 2009/0369 + 2012/0703

Manchester Road

Village 144 07/12/2006 Completed 4.95 3.96 29.1 36.4

3948 108.84 87.08 36.3 45.3

Total Dwellings 3948

Total Site Area 108.8

Total Net Area 87.4

Overall Gross Density 36.3

Overall Net Density 45.2

Table B Post-Core Strategy Densities


70

Application Reference

Location Core

Strategy Settlement

Total Dwelling

s

Date PP Granted

Status

Total Site Area

(Hectares)

Net Area Gross Densit

y

Net Densit

y

2012/0861

Land at Bamford Close, Dodworth, Barnsley

Urban Barnsley

39 28/02/2013 Completed 1.4 1.1 28 35

2012/0797

Land off Green Road, Dodworth, Barnsley, S75 3RR

Urban Barnsley

51 28/03/2013 Not commenced

2.2 1.8 23 29

2013/1073

Land Off Wakefield Road, Mapplewell, Barnsley

Urban Barnsley


10.3 7.7 24 32

2014/0429

Former Kingstone School, Broadway, Barnsley, S70 6RB

Urban Barnsley


5.2 4.1 32 39

2014/0474

Land North of Wilthorpe Road, Redbrook, Barnsley

Urban Barnsley


12.7 9.6 24 31

2014/0853

Former Priory School Site, Littleworth Lane, Barnsley, S71

Urban Barnsley


8.0 6.4 25 31


71

5RG

2014/1219

Land at Ellwood, Off Wilson Grove, Lundwood, Barnsley, S71 5JF

Urban Barnsley


3.6 2.9 31 39

2014/0807

Land at Carrington Avenue, Barnsley, S75 1BW

Urban Barnsley


2.6 2.1 32 41

2015/0646

30 Cross Street, Monk Bretton, Barnsley, S71 2EP

Urban Barnsley


3.6 2.8 27 33

2015/1277

Former Longcar Training Centre

Urban Barnsley


0.9 0.8 36 40

2015/0981

Land to the south-east of Dearne Hall Road and 1 and 3 Claycliffe Road, Low Barugh, Barnsley, S75 1LX

Urban Barnsley


10.1 7.5 17 23


72

2015/0962 & 2015/1407

Former North Gawber Colliery, Carr Green Lane, Mapplewell, Barnsley, S75 6DY

Urban Barnsley


13.1 9.8 24 32

2016/0259 Smithy Wood Lane

Urban Barnsley


1.1 0.9 32 40

2011/1562 Engine Lane, Goldthorpe

Goldthorpe 145 04/04/2012 Under construction

4.7 3.8 30 38

2013/0960 & 2011/0963

Land off Lowfield Road, Bolton Upon Dearne, Rotherham, S63 2TF

Goldthorpe 118 01/05/2015 Under construction

4.0 3.2 29 37

2015/1198

Land off Barnburgh Lane, Goldthorpe, Rotherham, S63 9NT

Goldthorpe 61 30/06/2016 Not commenced

1.9 1.5 32 39

2012/1337

Land Off Midland Road, Royston, Barnsley

Royston 146 19/03/2013 Under construction

3.7 2.9 40 50

2013/0932

Land to the North of Lee Lane Royston Barnsley S71 4RT

Royston 200 24/03/2014 Not commenced

8.8 7.0 23 28


73

2013/0785

Land off Hartcliff Road, Penistone, Barnsley

Penistone 139 05/09/2014 Under construction

4.8 3.8 29 36

2013/0866

Land off Barnsley Road, Wombwell, Barnsley

Wombwell 220 03/04/2014 Under construction

7.1 5.7 33 41

2015/1302

Former Highfield Grange Care Home, Blythe Street, Wombwell, Barnsley, S73 8LH

Wombwell 43 15/03/2016 Under construction

1.1 0.9 39 48

2013/1006

Land off Pilley Green/ Lidgett Lane, Tankersley, Barnsley, S75 3AE

Village 35 02/12/2014 Not commenced

2.5 2.0 14 18

2013/1007

Land off New Road/ Lidgett Lane, Tankersley, Barnsley, S75 3AE

Village 41 02/12/2014 Not commenced

2.7 2.1 15 19

2014/0754

Land at Church Lane, Hoylandswaine, Barnsley

Village 67 21/04/2015 Under construction

3.2 2.6 21 26


74

Total Dwellings 3060

Total Site Area 119.3

Total Net Area 93.2

Overall Gross Density 26

Overall Net Density 33

Documents

Local Plan Submission 2016 Housing Background Paper 1.0 ... · 2/3/2017 · Local Plan Housing Background Paper version 2 March 2017 Text shaded grey indicates main changes including