Upload
others
View
2
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Wiltshire Housing SiteAllocations Plan
Topic Paper 2Site Selection Process Methodology
July 2018Submission version
Information about Wiltshire Council services can be made available on request in other languages including BSL and formats such as large print and audio. Please contact the council on 0300 456 0100, by textphone on 01225 712500 or by email on [email protected].
Wiltshire Council
Executive summary
Stage
Site selection focuses on community areas where housing landsupply needs to be supplemented in order to meet WCS indicativelevels of housing development for 2006 - 2026
Areas of Search1
Land promoted for development is recorded in Strategic HousingLand Availability Assessment (SHLAA sites). These represent thepool of possibilities for Plan proposals.
Strategic Assessment– Exclusionary Criteria
2a
SHLAA sites are rejected from further consideration or their capacityreduced where affected by obstacles to development such asheritage and wildlife designations and flood plain, or because thesite is already a commitment for development or located in the builtup area.
SHLAA sites at some Large Villages are removed from furtherconsideration because previous and committed development already
Strategic Assessment– Rural Settlements
2b
meets those villages local needs, they are in AONB and alternativesare available or a Neighbourhood Plan for the settlement has alreadyreached an advanced stage.
Remaining SHLAA sites are assessed against 12 sustainabilityobjectives. Sites with major adverse effects are rejected. Other sitesare divided into ‘more’ or ‘less’ sustainable site options.
Sustainability Appraisalof site options
3
The suitability of site options, prioritising the more sustainable ones,is assessed in greater detail to develop them into possible plan
Selection of PreferredSites
4a
allocations. They are checked to be sure they fit with WCS strategyand preferred sites are selected.
The total contribution of all the preferred sites to each HousingMarket Area is assessed in terms of overall land supply and whether
Developing PlanProposals
4b
Plan objectives are met.The selection of preferred sites is amendedif necessary and confirmed as Plan proposal.
Plan proposals are checked to ensure that there is at least areasonable prospect of them being implemented
Viability Assessment5
A draft Plan is prepared containing the Plan proposals and theirlikely significant effects are assessed in combination against the 12sustainability objectives.
Sustainability Appraisalof Draft Plan and HRAscreening
6
The Plan is ‘screened’ under the Habitats Regulations as to whetherthe draft Plan will result in significant adverse effects upondesignated sites. As a consequence, an appropriate assessmentis carried out and mitigation measures proposed.
The Draft Plan is amended to include recommendations fromsustainability appraisal and HRA screening.
Draft Plan7
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 1
The Draft Plan has been published, supported by the following topic papers:
PurposeDocument
Reports on stages 1 to 4a of the site selection process foreach community area, including a summary of relevantoutputs from stage 3.
Community Area Topic Papers
Reports on the process and outcome of settlement boundaryreview for each community area settlement
Explains the process followed to review settlementboundaries and how it was developed
Topic Paper 1: SettlementBoundary Review Methodology
Explains the process followed to select preferred sites andproduce plan proposals
Topic Paper 2: Site SelectionProcess Methodology
Provides the quantitative evidence for housing landrequirements
Topic Paper 3 : Housing LandSupply
Reports on how preferred sites affect housing land supplyfor each Housing Market Area in terms of meeting WCSrequirements and the spatial strategy
Topic Paper 4 : Developing PlanProposals
Tests the ability of sites to be developed, provide policycompliant levels of affordable housing and necessaryinfrastructure
Topic Paper 5 : Assessment ofViability
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 3
5Introduction1
12The site selection process2
13Stage 1: Areas of search3
15Stage 2: Strategic assessment4
19Stage 3: Sustainability Appraisal5
21Stage 4: Selection of preferred sites and developing plan proposals6
23Stage 5 Viability assessment7
24Stage 6: Sustainability Appraisal of plan proposals and Habitats Regulation Assessment8
Appendices
26Stage 2 Strategic assessment - 2B: Large Villages1
33Stage 4a: Selection of preferred sites - detailed methodology2
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
1 Introduction
1.1 The purpose of the Wiltshire Housing Site Allocations Plan (‘the Plan’) is established in theWiltshire Core Strategy (WCS) to:
Revise, where necessary, settlement boundaries in relation to the Principal Settlementsof Salisbury and Trowbridge, Market Towns, Local Service Centres and Large Villages;and
Allocate new sites for housing to ensure the delivery of homes across the plan periodin order to maintain a five year land supply in each of Wiltshire’s three HMAs over theperiod to 2026.
Settlement Boundary Review
1.2 The Council did not review the extent of the boundaries to inform the WCS and relied uponthe former district local plans. They would instead be reviewed as a part of preparing thisPlan (paragraph 4.13 of the WCS).
1.3 Consequently, the Council has undertaken a comprehensive review of the boundaries toensure they are up-to-date and adequately reflect changes which have happened since theywere first established. The Plan amends settlement boundaries where necessary. It is alsothe prerogative of local communities to review them through the preparation of neighbourhoodplans.
1.4 A separate methodology topic paper explains the review process and how it was developed(1).
The Site Selection Process
1.5 The WCS refers to the role of this Plan, in combination with the Chippenham Site AllocationsPlan, to help ensure a sufficient choice and supply of suitable sites throughout the planperiod in accordance with national policy and to compliment Neighbourhood Planning.
1.6 The WCS disaggregates the scale of housing required over the plan period to three separateHousing Market Areas (HMAs) shown below (East, North and West and South).The NationalPlanning Policy Framework (NPPF) requires that each Local Planning Authority demonstratesthat there is five years supply of deliverable of land for housing development for each HMAbased on the implied delivery rates of the WCS requirement. Fluctuations can occur in thedelivery of housing but a central objective of the Plan, ensuring surety of supply, is to sustaina ‘five year housing land supply’ over the remainder of the plan period to 2026.
1 Topic Paper 1: Wiltshire Housing Site Allocations Plan - Settlement Boundary Review Methodology
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 5
Figure 1.1 Wiltshire Housing Market Areas
Page 6 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
1.7 The WCS also defines a hierarchy of settlements within the County and disaggregatesindicative levels of housing to each Community Area and includes indicative requirementsfor the Principal Settlements, Market Towns and in the South Wiltshire HMA, the LocalService Centres and their surrounding community areas(2). This distribution of developmentdirects the majority of development to these main settlements and promotes a sustainablepattern of development. The Plan’s allocations focus on those settlements and areas whereland supply falls short of the indicative levels. In so doing it helps to deliver the WCS spatialstrategy.
1.8 This document sets out the methodology for identifying suitable sites for housing developmentin accordance with the settlement strategy and housing market areas established in theWCS.
Context
1.9 The WCS contains a settlement strategy for managing growth over the period up to 2026.The strategy establishes tiers of settlements based on an understanding of their role andfunction; and how they relate to their immediate communities and wider hinterland.
1.10 Core Policy 1 of the Core Strategy identifies four categories of settlements, namely:
Principal SettlementsMarket TownsLocal Service CentresLarge and Small Villages
1.11 Except small villages each of these settlements has a “settlement boundary”. In simple terms,they are the dividing line, or boundary between areas of built/ urban development (thesettlement) and non-urban or rural development – the countryside. In general, developmentwithin the settlement boundary is, in principle, acceptable, whereas development outsidethe settlement boundary is, with limited exceptions, unacceptable.The WCS uses settlementboundaries as a policy tool for managing how development should take place.
1.12 The table below sets out the relationship between each settlement’s role within the settlementstrategy and the expected level of development under Core Policy 1.
Table 1.1 Settlement levels of development
Level of developmentSettlement
The primary focus for development and will provide significant levels ofjobs and homes
Principal Settlement
Have the potential for significant development that will increase thenumber of jobs and homes to help sustain/ enhance services andfacilities and promote self-containment and sustainable communities
Market Town
Modest levels of development to safeguard their role and deliveraffordable housing
Local Service Centre
Development limited to that need to help meet the housing needs ofsettlements and improve housing opportunities, services and facilities
Large village
2 Paragraph 4.26 and Table 1, WCS
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 7
Level of developmentSettlement
Some modest development may be appropriate to respond to localneeds and contribute to the vitality of rural communities but limited toinfill
Small village
1.13 Core Policy 2 of the WCS also proposes a minimum housing requirement for each HMA asfollows:
Table 1.2 : Housing Market Areas housing requirements
Minimum housing requirement (dwellings)Housing Market Area (HMA)
5,940East Wiltshire
24,740North and West Wiltshire
10,420South Wiltshire
1.14 Table 1 and the Area Strategy Policies of the WCS provide indicative housing requirementsfor settlements, community area remainders and community areas.
Table 1.3 Community Area indicative requirements
Indicative requirement2006-2026
Area
2,010Devizes
490Devizes CA remainder
2,500Devizes CA Total
680Marlborough
240Marlborough CA remainder
920Marlborough CA Total
600Pewsey CA Total
1,750Tidworth and Ludgershall
170Tidworth CA remainder
1,920Tidworth CA Total
5,940EAST WILTSHIRE HMA
595Bradford on Avon
185Bradford on Avon CA remainder
780Bradford on Avon CA Total
1,440Calne
Page 8 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
Indicative requirement2006-2026
Area
165Calne CA remainder
1,605Calne CA Total
4,510Chippenham
580Chippenham CA remainder
5,090Chippenham CA Total
1,220Corsham
175Corsham CA remainder
1,395Corsham CA Total
885Malmesbury
510Malmesbury CA remainder
1,395Malmesbury CA Total
2,240Melksham and Bowerhill
130Melksham CA remainder
2,370Melksham CA Total
1,070Royal Wootton Bassett
385Royal Wootton Bassett and Cricklade CA remainder(3)
1,455Royal Wootton Bassett and Cricklade CA(3) Total
6,810Trowbridge
165Trowbridge CA remainder
6,975Trowbridge CA Total
1,920Warminster
140Warminster CA remainder
2,060Warminster CA Total
1,500Westbury
115Westbury CA remainder
1,615Westbury CA Total
24,740NORTH & WEST WILTSHIRE HMA
3 Totals for Royal Wootton Bassett & Cricklade CA remainder and Royal Wootton Bassett & Cricklade CA exclude any developmentat the West of Swindon.
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 9
Indicative requirement2006-2026
Area
2,440Amesbury, Bulford and Durrington
345Amesbury CA remainder
2,785Amesbury CA Total
235Mere
50Mere CA remainder
285Mere CA Total
6,060Salisbury
Wilton
255Wilton CA remainder
6,315Salisbury and Wilton CAs Total
190Downton
425Southern Wiltshire CA remainder
615Southern Wiltshire CA Total
200Tisbury
220Tisbury CA remainder
420Tisbury CA Total
10,420SOUTH WILTSHIRE HMA
1.15 Paragraph 4.30 of the WCS makes clear however that:
"The disaggregation to Community Areas set out above is not intended to be so prescriptiveas to be inflexible and potentially ineffective in delivering the identified level of housingfor each market area. It clarifies the council’s intentions in the knowledge of likelyconstraints in terms of market realism, infrastructure and environmental capacity. Theyprovide a strategic context for the preparation of the Housing Sites Allocation DPD andin order to plan for appropriate infrastructure provision.”
1.16 There are a number of sources for new homes to meet the requirements of Core Policy 2.They include:
strategic allocations made within the WCSretained Local Plan allocationsexisting commitmentsregeneration projects, for example, those in Chippenham, Trowbridge and Salisburyneighbourhood planswindfall
Page 10 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
1.17 Sites identified in the Plan supplement housing land supply providing not just an additionalnumber of homes but improving the choice of location and house types.
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 11
2 The site selection process
Plan Objectives
2.1 The Plan allocates sites for housing development to ensure enough land is allocated to helpmeet the minimum requirements of each housing market area. In so doing, the Plan hasbeen prepared to achieve the following objectives:
1. To help demonstrate a rolling five year supply of deliverable land for housingdevelopment.In principle, land within settlements, in particular previously developed land, is acceptablefor housing redevelopment. A realistic allowance is included for this source of newhousing when calculating the scale of land supply(4). Within a predominantly rural areahowever, there is a limited amount of previously developed land. Not only are suchopportunities limited, they can also be difficult to rely on as a large proportion of overallsupply. The consequence is that the Plan must identify a number of sites involving theloss of countryside. As the WCS recognises it is a challenge to plan for sufficient newhomes in Wiltshire(5).
2. To allocate sites at the settlements in the County that support the spatial strategyof the Wiltshire Core StrategyThe spatial strategy describes a hierarchy of settlements within the County. Each tierrecognises the particular role of those settlements and plans a level of new housingdevelopment that is appropriate. Chippenham, Salisbury and Trowbridge, are PrincipalSettlements supported by a number of market towns. Designated large and smallvillages all serve their rural hinterlands. Local service centres have also been identifiedthat have a more pronounced role than villages. They possess a level of facilities andservices that provide the best opportunities outside the Market Towns for sustainabledevelopment.
4 See Topic Paper 3: Housing Land Supply, Wiltshire Council, (Jul 2017)5 WCS, paragraph 2.12, Wiltshire Council (Jan 2015)
Page 12 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
3 Stage 1: Areas of search
Site selection focuses on community areas where housing land supply needs to be supplemented inorder to meet WCS indicative levels of housing development for 2006 – 2026
Defining ‘Areas of Search’
3.1 The site selection methodology, as a first stage, prioritises the consideration of housing sitesat those settlements and areas(6) where land supply needs to be supplemented in order tohelp meet the distribution and levels of housing provided by the WCS. These locations aretermed ‘Areas of Search’.
3.2 There are WCS Core Policies for each Community Area in the County. They propose a levelof housing for each Principal Settlement, Market Town and some of the Local Service Centresdesignated by the WCS. An approximate provision is made for the remainder of theCommunity Area (‘the Community Area remainder’). For the purposes of this Plan theselevels are termed indicative requirements.
3.3 Initial Areas of Search are therefore Principal Settlements, Market Towns, some Local ServiceCentres and those Community Area remainders, where evidence suggests additional housingland is necessary to meet indicative requirements. In these areas there is a quantified needfor development.
3.4 With regard to Community Area remainders, Core Policy 2 limits development to infill withinthe existing built up area at designated Small Villages. The Plan therefore does not seek toidentify land for housing development at Small Villages. Instead, where a community arearemainder is identified as an Area of Search, the focus of the approach to site selection isLocal Service Centres (which in the North and West and East HMAs do not have a specificindicative housing requirements) and Large Villages.
Neighbourhood Planning
3.5 Neighbourhood Plans are an important part of the planning system. The National PlanningPolicy Framework (NPPF) describes their role:
Neighbourhood planning gives communities direct power to develop a shared vision fortheir neighbourhood and deliver the sustainable development they need. Parishes andneighbourhood forums can use neighbourhood planning to:
set planning policies through neighbourhood plans to determine decisions on planningapplications...”(7)
3.6 The Council supports passing direct powers over planning to local communities as a part ofbuilding up the resilience of local communities.
3.7 Referring to the role of Local Plans prepared by the Council the NPPF states:
“Local planning authorities should set out the strategic priorities for the area in the LocalPlan. This should include strategic policies to deliver:
6 Each area strategy, for each community area in the WCS, proposes a level of housing for Principal Settlements, Market Towns andthe ‘Community Area Remainder’. A level of housing is also proposed at some of the Local Service Centres designated by the WCS.For further information about the role and function of each tier of the County’s settlement hierarchy see Core Policy 1 of the WCSand its supporting text.
7 National Planning Policy Framework, DCLG, March 2012 para 183
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 13
the homes and jobs needed in the area ...”(8)
3.8 It is only necessary for this Plan to allocate land for housing development where it is astrategic priority to do so. WCS Core Policy 1 proposes that development at Large Villagesshould be limited to that needed to help meet the housing needs of settlements and toimprove employment opportunities, services and facilities. Unless there is a strategic priorityto deliver the homes needed in an HMA, then the most appropriate means to assess localneeds and plan growth at each Large Village is through the neighbourhood planning process.
3.9 Topic Paper 3 explains that here is a high level of existing housing supply in the East WiltshireHMA and unlike the two other HMAs, a forecast rolling supply 20% in excess of five yearsfor all the remaining years of the plan period except the last. At the outset, therefore, it wasconsidered unnecessary to allocate sites for housing development at Large Villages in thisHMA. At this level of settlement, the priority should be for communities to meet local needsfor housing through neighbourhood planning. Possible plan allocations were however stillconsidered at Market Towns and the Local Service Centre where there was an indicativerequirement.
3.10 Assessment at Stage 2b (see paragraph 4.16 below) looks separately at each Large Villagewithin Areas of Search and the role being played by neighbourhood plans in meeting housingneeds at individual settlements.
Community Area Topic Papers
3.11 Topic Papers have been prepared for all the Community Areas using a 2017 baseline forinformation on dwellings built or already committed compared to indicative requirements.They show how land supply will meet indicative housing requirements for the WCS planperiod or whether fresh land for housing needs to be allocated in accordance with theremaining stages of the site selection process.
3.12 Plan allocations based on the 2017 baseline are the culmination of reviews of Areas ofSearch that have taken place whilst the Plan was being prepared. 2014 data was the firstbaseline. Since then, as work has progressed on the Plan, some areas have been excludedbecause they have met indicative requirements by a combination of dwellings built, existingallocations or land with planning consent. (Topic Paper 3 Table 1.1 shows how residualindicative requirements changed during the formation of the Plan.)
8 National Planning Policy Framework, DCLG, March 2012 para 156
Page 14 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
4 Stage 2: Strategic assessment
2A: Exclusionary Criteria
Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) sites are rejected from further considerationor their capacity reduced where affected by obstacles to development such as heritage and wildlifedesignations and flood plain or because the site is already a commitment for development or locatedin the built up area.
4.1 All councils are required to maintain a register of land that is put forward for development.This is referred to as the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA). WithinAreas of Search the SHLAA provides a pool of land opportunities for possible housingdevelopment. Sites with a capacity of less than five dwellings were considered too small forinclusion in the Plan. From this pool SHLAA sites unrelated to Principal Settlements, MarketTowns, Local Service Centres and Large Villages have been excluded.Those sites remainingare therefore broadly consistent with the Plan objective of making land allocations to supportthe WCS spatial strategy and focus development in these settlements.
4.2 Other land, not included in the SHLAA(9), may possibly be capable of development butbecause neither a developer nor landowner has promoted the site for development, the sitecannot be said to be available within the plan period(10). It cannot be counted on to supplementhousing land supply and therefore, for the Plan to be effective, land other than SHLAA siteshas not been considered for inclusion.
4.3 SHLAA sites were therefore the basic building blocks of the Plan, but they simply amountto land put forward for development(11). This does not mean any particular site is capableor suitable for development; either in part or whole.
4.4 For the Plan to be effective, SHLAA sites need to be suitable and capable of being builtduring the plan period.The availability of each SHLAA site being reviewed was also checkedwith its owner or promoter. The National Planning Policy Framework describes land forhousing development in terms of being, ‘developable’, ‘available’ and ‘suitable’.(12)
4.5 The site selection process considers their suitability to help meet housing requirements.Their suitability may be affected by a variety of different constraints. It may also be the casethat SHLAA sites are not developable, for example because there is no reasonable prospectof creating a suitable vehicle access. In such circumstances, they do not represent areasonable alternative.
4.6 There may be a number of barriers to development ruling out a site in whole or part: forexample, SHLAA sites involving land with areas at risk of flooding or protected by adesignation because of important biodiversity interests or heritage value.
4.7 A systematic strategic assessment has tested each SHLAA site against a number ofexclusionary criteria. These were:
9 Since the publication of the pre-submission draft Plan, further assessment has been undertaken to include sites that werepromoted to the Council through the pre-submission consultation and were in areas of search, or to re-assess sites wherenew evidence was submitted through the consultation
10 All those submitting a SHLAA site were contacted to confirm land was available for inclusion in the plan.11 The site selection process did not consider SHLAA sites that had a gross capacity of less than 5 dwellings12 Footnote 12 of the National Planning Policy Framework, DCLG, March 2012
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 15
Table 4.1 : Exclusionary criteria
Exclusionary criteria
Is the SHLAA site fully or partly a commitment? Or is the site fully or partly within a PrincipalEmployment Area, or other existing development plan allocation? Or is the site isolated fromthe urban edge of the settlement i.e. not adjacent to the settlement boundary and not adjacentto a SHLAA site that is?
Is the site fully or partly within the settlement boundary
Is the site fully or partly within one more of the following environmental designations ofbiodiversity or geological value?
SAC
SPA
Ramsar sites
National Nature Reserve
Ancient woodland
SSSI
Is the site fully or partly within green belt?
Is the site fully or partly within flood risk areas, zones 2 or 3?
Is the site fully or partly within areas involving any of the following internationally or nationallydesignated heritage asset?
World Heritage Site
Scheduled Ancient Monument
Historic Park and Garden
Registered Park and Garden
Registered Battlefield
4.8 Some SHLAA sites were detached from a settlement’s built up area. Greenfield developmentshould take place in a way that expands an existing built up area in order to properly managethe growth of settlements and prevent the premature loss of open countryside.
4.9 SHLAA sites entirely within a settlement boundary were also excluded from the site selectionprocess(13). In principle, brownfield sites carry a presumption in favour of development andestablishing an allocation for development is unnecessary.The council may grant permission
13 SHLAA sites that would no longer be within the settlement boundary as a result of boundary review were treated by the site selectionprocess as if they were already outside.
Page 16 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
in principle for housing-led development(14). Important brownfield sites may also advanceswiftly by more flexible development briefs or more simply through the planning applicationprocess.This different approach is often more adaptable to individual circumstance and maybetter deliver the higher priority accorded to developing brownfield land. In accordance withnational guidance, an allowance is made for windfall development. Calculated individuallyfor each Housing Market Area, this ensures this source of land supply is fully and properlyaccounted for as a part of land supply. (Allowances estimated for smaller areas, such asindividual towns, are difficult to substantiate and would not be statistically valid.)
4.10 SHLAA sites were rejected or reduced in capacity because one or more of the considerationsin Table 4.1 applied to part of a site or the whole, leaving a smaller set of potential siteswithin Areas of Search. Each Community Area Topic Paper records all the SHLAA sites thatare unaffected by exclusionary criteria, those that were rejected or their capacity reducedin size because of them. (An example extract is provided at appendix one of this paper.)Where reduced, the whole SHLAA area was still considered in later stages of the selectionprocess but with a lower development capacity. Land, unsuited to development, yet withinthe control of a developer could be important to a scheme as a benefit (for example, as openspace) or as a means to help mitigate harmful adverse effects of development (for example,by being used for tree planting).
2B: Large villages and Local Service Centres
SHLAA sites at some Large Villages are removed from further consideration because previous andcommitted development already meets those villages local needs, they are in AONB and alternativesare available or a Neighbourhood Plan for the settlement has already reached an advanced stage.
4.11 The WCS provides indicative requirements for new housing at each of the County’s mainsettlements. It provides an approximate scale of housing development for the remainder ofa community area. These areas may contain several rural settlements that do not haveindividually prescribed levels of development unlike Market Towns and Principal Settlements.
4.12 The spatial strategy requires new housing development at Large and Small Villages to belimited to that needed to help meet the housing needs of settlements and to improveemployment opportunities, services and facilities. Some rural settlements are designatedas Local Service Centres where levels of facilities and local employment suggest greaterpotential for growth and better self-containment.
4.13 Housing development at Small Villages is required to take the form purely of limited infill.House building will be small in scale, for sites of single figures and the Plan does not seekto identify sites of less than five dwellings.
4.14 On the other hand, all SHLAA sites at Local Service Centres were assessed since the WCSspecifically identifies these settlements as more suited to growth.
4.15 Opportunities at some Large Villages, however, have not been explored because localhousing needs for the plan period have already been accommodated; either throughdevelopment that has already taken place or that is planned. Further development broughtabout by additional Plan allocations would exceed meeting local needs and result in conflictwith WCS Core Policy 1. SHLAA sites at these Large Villages were not therefore consideredreasonable alternatives.
14 The Town and Country Planning (Brownfield Land Register) Regulations 2017
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 17
4.16 Another factor was that for some large villages growth has already been thoroughly consideredby Neighbourhood Plans, where these plans have advanced to a sufficient stage(15). It is apriority of the Council for local communities to take direct control over planning theirsettlements, as it is national policy. Alternative consideration by the Housing Site AllocationsPlan would contradict that priority and conflict with policy contained in the NPPF.
4.17 Preparing a Neighbourhood Plan addresses the housing needs of a settlement in accordancewith Core Policy 1 of the WCS. It is unnecessary for the Plan to supplement localconsideration. SHLAA sites at Large Villages where Neighbourhood Plan preparation is atan advanced stage are not considered reasonable alternatives.
4.18 In rural areas involving Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB), Large Villages outsidethe AONB are preferred locations to consider housing allocations compared to those atsettlements inside the designation (provided they have not already experienced developmentmeeting local needs and there are site options to consider). In these circumstances, consistentwith national policy on AONBs(16), options at Large Villages within the designation are notconsidered reasonable alternatives.
4.19 In a few cases, other reasons specific to particular Large Villages also prevented them frombeing considered reasonable alternatives. These instances are documented in the relevantCommunity Area Topic Paper and an example is included in appendix one.
15 Where a Neighbourhood Plan has been publicised by the Council under Regulation 16 of the Neighbourhood Planning (General)Regulations 2012
16 NPPF paragraphs 115-116, DCLG (Mar 2012)
Page 18 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
5 Stage 3: Sustainability Appraisal
SHLAA sites are assessed against 12 sustainability objectives. Sites with major adverse effects arerejected. Other sites are divided into ‘more’ or ‘less’ sustainable site options.
5.1 After a high level assessment, remaining potential sites have been assessed usingsustainability appraisal. This is a transparent and systematic way of carrying out a detailedassessment of the performance of all the remaining site options using a sustainability appraisalframework.
5.2 The sustainability appraisal framework contains 12 objectives that cover the likelyenvironmental, social and economic effects of development.
Table 5.1 Sustainability objectives
Sustainability objectives
1. Protect and enhance all biodiversity and geological features and avoid irreversible losses2. Ensure efficient and effective use of land and the use of suitably located previously developed
land and buildings3. Use and manage water resources in a sustainable manner4. Improve air quality throughout Wiltshire and minimise all sources of environmental pollution5. Minimise impacts on climate change
a. through reducing greenhouse gas emissionb. through reducing our vulnerability to future climate change effects.
6. Protect, maintain and enhance the historic environment7. Conserve and enhance the character and quality of Wiltshire’s rural and urban landscapes,
maintaining and strengthening local distinctiveness and sense of place8. Provide everyone with the opportunity to live in good quality, affordable housing, and ensure
an appropriate mix of dwelling sizes, types and tenures9. Reduce poverty and deprivation and promote more inclusive and self- contained communities10. Reduce the need to travel and promote more sustainable transport choices.11. Encourage a vibrant and diversified economy and provide for long-term sustainable economic
growth12. Ensure adequate provision of high quality employment land and diverse employment
opportunities to meet the needs of local businesses and a changing workforce
5.3 The performance of each site has been assessed against each of the objectives using a setof decision-aiding questions. Each option was then scored under each objective based ona generic assessment scale from major positive to a major adverse effect.
Table 5.2 : Sustainability Appraisal - Generic assessment scale
Option likely to have a major adverse effect on the objective withno satisfactory mitigation possible. Option may be inappropriatefor mixed use development
Major adverse effect (---)
Option likely to have a moderate adverse effect on the objectivewith difficult or problematic mitigation
Moderate adverse effect (--)
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 19
Option likely to have a minor adverse effect on the objectivebecause mitigation measures are achievable to reduce thesignificance of effects
Minor adverse effect (-)
On balance option likely to have a neutral effect on the objectiveor no effect on the objective
Neutral or no effect (0)
Option likely to have a minor positive effect on the objective asenhancement of existing conditions may result
Minor positive effect (+)
Option likely to have a moderate positive effect on the objectiveas it would help resolve an existing issue
Moderate positive effect (++)
Option likely to have a major positive effect on the objective asit would help maximise opportunities
Major positive effect (+++)
5.4 Objectives and decision aiding questions resulted from consultation on a scoping report.The appraisal used common evidence and the process therefore ensured a transparent,consistent and equitable comparison of all reasonable alternatives.
5.5 Potential sites are rejected where the appraisal concludes development would result in oneor more major adverse effects with no satisfactory mitigation possible.
5.6 The remaining potential sites in each area or settlement are compared in terms of the balanceof their sustainability benefits versus adverse effects. The appraisal therefore suggestspotential sites that are ‘more sustainable’, ‘less sustainable’ and rejected others. Wherepotential sites were rejected, the reasons for doing so are clearly stated.There is a separatedraft Sustainability Appraisal Report, but each Community Area paper summarises theassessment and its recommendations.
Page 20 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
6 Stage 4: Selection of preferred sites and developing planproposals
4A: Selection of preferred sites
The suitability of site options, prioritising the more sustainable ones, is assessed in greater detail todevelop them into possible plan allocations. They are checked to be sure they fit with WCS strategyand preferred sites are selected.
6.1 The site options that were identified to be taken forward from Stage 3 were analysed further.The focus for further work was the set of ‘more sustainable’ sites identified at stage 3. Furtherconsultation with specialist consultees(17) helped to develop potential sites into site optionswith individual housing capacities and specific boundaries. Consultation also helped toidentify requirements that should be highlighted for individual site options, to guide the formdevelopment should take, including the definition of realistic site boundaries.
6.2 Stage 4a is carried out in five steps. Steps 1-4 are carried out for each of the ‘more sustainablesites’ recommended by the Stage 3 SA results. In exceptional circumstances it was necessaryfor further assessment of ‘less sustainable sites’. Step 5 considers the area of search as awhole, selects and justifies the selection of preferred sites and concludes with a set of draftproposals.
6.3 Step 1 transforms a SHLAA site into a possible draft proposal by a more detailed assessmentof the significant effects identified in Stage 3.
6.4 A range of stakeholders were invited to comment on the site options. Input was particularlytargeted to address likely adverse effects and mitigation predicted by sustainability appraisal(stage 3). The capacity of some sites, for example, was reduced to allow for larger areas oflandscaping to mitigate potentially harmful visual impacts. In some cases, more detailedassessment revealed that adverse effects associated with the development of a site couldnot be adequately mitigated or were greater than expected.
6.5 Step 2 assessed how well a site may contribute to the relevant area strategy for the widercommunity area in terms of how much it might contribute to housing requirements, deliverthe vision for the area or address specific local issues.
6.6 Step 3 is a further specific assessment of whether a site at a Large Village is consistent withCore Policy 1; that it would constitute growth to meet local needs, including local housingneeds.This also takes note of how work on Neighbourhood Plans has progressed since firstconsidered at stage 2 and the extent to which they may contain housing proposals of theirown.
6.7 Step 4 is a summary conclusion for each site with a measure of the net sustainability benefitsof each site.
6.8 Step 5 considered all the sites in each Area of Search together and resulted in the selectionand rejection of sites. All sites that have satisfied Steps 1-3 were taken forward. This stepcompared the total dwellings that are provided by the pool of sites to indicative residualrequirements.Where necesssary, it selects and justifies site options that need to be rejectedbecause the overall scales of development exceed that proposed by each area strategy and
17 Heritage, Landscape, Ecology, Drainage, Transport, Education, Public Protection specialists within Wiltshire Council, HighwaysEngland , Natural England and Environment Agency and Heritage England.
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 21
growth would not result in sustainable development. For example, if several site options ata large village suggest too much development, in excess of local needs, then a site mayneed to be rejected.
6.9 The result of this five step assessment were a set of draft allocations in the form of detailedsite boundaries and an approximate dwelling capacity. Each Community Area Paper alsoidentifies particular considerations connected to a given site that should be referred to bythe Plan.
6.10 Assessments are recorded in each Community Area Paper and they use a common templateof guidance (included in this paper in appendix two) and evidence sources.
4B:Testing Plan Proposals
The total contribution of all the preferred sites to each Housing Market Area is assessed in terms ofoverall land supply and whether Plan objectives are met.The selection of preferred sites is amendedif necessary and confirmed as Plan proposal.
6.11 Previous stages assessed site options. Together the total amount of housing proposed inthe Plan should aim to ensure overall supply at least meet housing market area requirements.The form housing land supply takes should also provide for a demonstrable supply ofdeliverable land for each year in the plan period. This step checked the degree to which thiswould be achieved with the additional of the sites preferred from stage 4a. It assessed theresilience of supply using several different tests.
6.12 This stage also checked how all the draft allocations together fitted with the spatial strategy;in terms of the overall distribution of housing growth; the approach to rural areas; and therole of Principal Settlements and Market Towns. The rationale for the Plan is to supplementhousing land supply.This is a strategic priority stemming from the WCS.The spatial strategyexpects development at villages to respond to local needs. It is Government and the Council’swish to give direct power to local communities to articulate their own visions for their area,to define and respond to their own local need. Therefore, where land supply can meetobjectives of the Plan without allocating sites at villages then it should not. There is nostrategic priority. This stage has therefore specifically reviewed the purpose and the casefor making allocations at Large Villages.
6.13 This stage has also identified those sites in each HMA that are important to ensure supplyand assessed whether the Plan would be in general conformity with the WCS. The resultsof this assessment are reported in a separate Topic Paper 4: Developing Plan Proposals.
Page 22 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
7 Stage 5 Viability assessment
To ensure preferred sites are viable and capable of development in accordance with national policyrequirements
7.1 Viability assessment has verified that preferred sites and the scale of development identifiedin the plan are not subject to such a scale of obligations and policy burdens that their abilityto be developed viably is threatened. It also shows that preferred sites are capable of providingpolicy compliant levels of affordable homes and that they are capable of contributing fully tothe WCS target for the plan period. Assessment has been carried out by independent expertson this aspect and their report has been published separately(18).
18 Topic Paper 5: Viability Assessment
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 23
8 Stage 6: Sustainability Appraisal of plan proposals and HabitatsRegulation Assessment
To draft Plan proposals and assess them against Sustainability Appraisal objectives, including incombination and cumulative effects
8.1 This stage of the assessment considered the impact of the Plan as whole, its cumulativeeffects as well as effects in combination with other plans and projects.
8.2 Following completion of the viability assessment, a further stage of sustainability appraisalwas undertaken to assess whether further refinements were necessary to improve mitigationmeasures and to see that the Plan delivers the most sustainability benefits possible.
8.3 In terms of biodiversity, the impact of potential sites on European Designations is an importantfactor in the selection of preferred sites.The Plan as whole however is also required throughthe Habitats Directive and the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (asamended), to consider if it may have a likely significant effect on European Sites either aloneor in combination with other plans or projects. The assessment is published separately andshows there is sufficient mitigation. This included the identification of specific measures atindividual plan allocations.
Page 24 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
[Insert Site Selection Process Flowchart aka Figure 2]
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 25
Ap
pen
dix
1 S
tag
e 2
Str
ateg
ic a
sses
smen
t -
2B: L
arg
e V
illag
es
Lar
ge
Vill
ages
Ass
essm
ent
Cri
teri
a
Dilt
on
Mar
shB
ratt
on
509
819
Nu
mb
er o
f d
wel
ling
s in
vill
age
(200
6)(1
9)H
ave
loca
l ho
usi
ng
nee
ds
for
the
Pla
n p
erio
d a
lrea
dy
bee
nm
et?
Ho
usi
ng
co
mp
leti
on
s (2
006
–20
16)(2
0)
2120
Dev
elo
pab
le c
om
mit
men
ts (2
016
– 20
26)
16
Pro
po
rtio
nat
e %
gro
wth
of v
illag
e(2
006
– 20
26)
4.3%
3.2%
1920
11 c
ensu
s da
ta (
min
us h
ousi
ng c
ompl
etio
ns 2
011-
2016
)20
Not
e: C
ompl
etio
ns a
nd c
omm
itmen
ts m
ay n
ot a
dd u
p to
the
tota
l for
the
Are
a of
Sea
rch,
as
the
tota
l als
o in
clud
es h
ousi
ng d
evel
opm
ent o
utsi
de o
f the
Lar
ge V
illag
es e
.g. a
t Sm
all V
illag
es a
nd o
pen
coun
trys
ide.
Page 26 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
Lar
ge
Vill
ages
Ass
essm
ent
Cri
teri
a
Dilt
on
Mar
shB
ratt
on
No.
The
re is
no
Nei
ghbo
urho
odP
lan
unde
r pr
epar
atio
n.
No
RH
NS
ava
ilabl
e.
No.
The
re is
no
Nei
ghbo
urho
odP
lan
unde
r pr
epar
atio
n.
In 2
013,
a R
ural
Hou
sing
Nee
dsS
urve
y (R
HN
S)
iden
tifie
d, u
ntil
2015
, a n
eed
for
Sub
sidi
sed
rent
edho
usin
g:
• 2x
one
bed
room
hom
es•
1x tw
o be
droo
m h
ome
• 2x
thre
e be
droo
m h
omes
Sha
red
/ Low
cos
t hom
e ow
ners
hip
• 2x
two
bedr
oom
hom
es•
1x fo
ur b
edro
om h
ome
Hav
e lo
cal h
ou
sin
g n
eed
s al
read
y b
een
co
nsi
der
ed b
y a
suff
icie
ntly
adva
nce
d n
eig
hb
ou
rho
od
pla
n?
Dilt
on M
arsh
is r
elat
ivel
yun
cons
trai
ned.
The
re a
re C
ount
yW
ildlif
e S
ites
to th
e so
uth
and
wes
t,co
nnec
ted
to th
e vi
llage
.
Bra
tton
does
not
fall
with
in a
ny A
rea
of O
utst
andi
ng N
atur
al B
eaut
yde
sign
atio
ns, b
ut is
cov
ered
by
aS
peci
al L
ands
cape
Are
a
Are
th
ere
any
po
ten
tial
env
iro
nm
enta
l co
nst
rain
ts (
e.g
. str
ateg
icen
viro
nm
enta
l/ la
nd
scap
e d
esig
nat
ion
s an
d h
erit
age
asse
ts)?
desi
gnat
ion
whi
ch w
ould
nee
d to
be
a co
nsid
erat
ion
in a
ny fu
ture
deve
lopm
ents
at t
he v
illag
e. A
larg
epa
rt o
f the
vill
age
is a
lso
desi
gnat
ed
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 27
Lar
ge
Vill
ages
Ass
essm
ent
Cri
teri
a
Dilt
on
Mar
shB
ratt
on
with
in a
con
serv
atio
n ar
ea, a
ndth
ere
are
a nu
mbe
r of
eco
logy
desi
gnat
ions
in th
e vi
llage
hint
erla
nd.
Pri
mar
y sc
ho
ol p
rovi
sio
nT
here
is a
prim
ary
scho
ol in
the
villa
ge, a
lthou
gh th
e sc
hool
is fu
llan
d fo
reca
st to
rem
ain
so, a
nd
Pri
mar
y sc
ho
ol p
rovi
sio
nT
his
scho
ol h
as a
larg
e nu
mbe
r of
surp
lus
plac
es a
nd w
ould
ben
efit
from
hou
sing
with
in th
e ca
tchm
ent
area
.
Are
th
ere
any
kno
wn
str
ateg
ic in
fras
tru
ctu
re c
on
stra
ints
(e.
g.
edu
cati
on
, tra
nsp
ort
an
d u
tilit
ies)
?
cann
ot b
e ex
pand
ed.T
here
are
als
opr
essu
res
on p
rimar
y ed
ucat
ion
capa
city
in W
estb
ury,
and
Dilt
onM
arsh
Prim
ary
Sch
ool
Sec
on
dar
y sc
ho
ol p
rovi
sio
nac
com
mod
ates
pup
ils c
omin
g in
from
Wes
tbur
y. F
urth
erM
atra
vers
cur
rent
ly h
as s
ome
surp
lus
plac
es b
ut th
ese
are
expe
cted
to fi
ll ov
er th
e ne
xt fe
w
deve
lopm
ent a
t Dilt
on M
arsh
islik
ely
to c
ause
an
issu
e w
ith p
rimar
yed
ucat
ion
capa
city
in th
e ar
ea, a
ndye
ars
as h
ousi
ng a
lread
y ap
prov
edho
usin
g al
loca
tions
sho
uld
not b
eis
bui
lt pl
us la
rger
coh
orts
will
beg
inco
nsid
ered
in th
is v
illag
e un
til th
ew
ider
prim
ary
educ
atio
n ca
paci
tyha
s be
en a
ddre
ssed
.
to fe
ed th
roug
h fr
om th
e pr
imar
ysc
hool
s.T
he s
choo
l cou
ld b
eex
pand
ed w
hen
nece
ssar
y.
Page 28 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
Lar
ge
Vill
ages
Ass
essm
ent
Cri
teri
a
Dilt
on
Mar
shB
ratt
on
Sec
on
dar
y sc
ho
ol p
rovi
sio
nM
atra
vers
cur
rent
ly h
as s
ome
surp
lus
plac
es b
ut th
ese
are
expe
cted
to fi
ll ov
er th
e ne
xt fe
w
Tran
spo
rt
A r
egul
ar b
us s
ervi
ce e
xist
sco
nnec
ting
the
villa
ge w
ith W
estb
ury
and
Trow
brid
ge.
year
s as
hou
sing
alre
ady
appr
oved
is b
uilt
plus
larg
er c
ohor
ts w
ill b
egin
to fe
ed th
roug
h fr
om th
e pr
imar
ysc
hool
s.T
he s
choo
l cou
ld b
eex
pand
ed w
hen
nece
ssar
y.
Tran
spo
rt
A r
egul
ar b
us s
ervi
ce e
xist
sco
nnec
ting
the
villa
ge w
ith W
estb
ury
and
Trow
brid
ge.
The
Par
ish
Cou
ncil
did
not r
espo
ndto
con
sulta
tion
on th
e H
ousi
ng S
iteA
lloca
tions
DP
D.
Bra
tton
Par
ish
Cou
ncil
have
adv
ised
Wilt
shire
Cou
ncil
that
SH
LAA
site
321
is a
site
with
pot
entia
l for
Ho
w d
id t
he
par
ish
co
un
cil r
esp
on
d t
o p
revi
ou
s co
nsu
ltat
ion
s o
nth
e W
iltsh
ire
Ho
usi
ng
Sit
es A
lloca
tio
ns
Pla
n?
build
ing
in th
e fu
ture
bea
ring
in m
ind
it is
in th
e S
alis
bury
Pla
in S
peci
alLa
ndsc
ape
Are
a an
d, a
s it
is a
t the
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 29
Lar
ge
Vill
ages
Ass
essm
ent
Cri
teri
a
Dilt
on
Mar
shB
ratt
on
Wes
t ent
ranc
e to
the
villa
ge, a
nyde
velo
pmen
t sho
uld
be d
esig
ned
topr
esen
t an
attr
activ
e as
pect
bot
h in
term
s of
land
scap
e an
d ar
chite
ctur
eto
this
app
roac
h.
6 si
tes
3 si
tes
Ho
w m
any
site
s w
ere
sub
mit
ted
to t
he
SH
LA
A?
Sit
es s
ub
mit
ted
to th
e S
trat
egic
Ho
usi
ng
Lan
d A
vaila
bili
tyA
sses
smen
tS
HLA
A s
ites
175,
100
8, 1
009,
103
8,10
43, 3
270
SH
LAA
site
s 32
1, 7
38, 3
527
1 si
te (
335
dw
ellin
gs)
1 si
te (
32 d
wel
ling
s)
SH
LA
A s
ite
321
Ho
w m
any
SH
LA
A s
ites
do
no
tm
eet
the
Sta
ge
2a s
trat
egic
con
stra
ints
an
d c
ou
ld b
e ta
ken
forw
ard
for
mo
re d
etai
led
asse
ssm
ent
(to
tal r
emai
nin
gca
pac
ity(2
1))?
SH
LA
A s
ite
3270
21S
eeA
ppen
dix
4 to
this
pap
er fo
r th
e fu
ll as
sess
men
t of S
HLA
A s
ites
at S
tage
2a
of th
e si
te s
elec
tion
proc
ess.
Page 30 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
Lar
ge
Vill
ages
Ass
essm
ent
Cri
teri
a
Dilt
on
Mar
shB
ratt
on
Dilt
on M
arsh
is n
ot w
ithin
an
Are
aof
Out
stan
ding
Nat
ural
Bea
uty
orot
her l
ands
cape
des
igna
tion.
The
re
Bra
tton
does
not
fall
with
in a
ny A
rea
of O
utst
andi
ng N
atur
al B
eaut
yde
sign
atio
ns, b
ut is
cov
ered
by
a
Taki
ng
the
abov
e in
to a
cco
un
t, is
ther
e an
y ju
stif
icat
ion
for
rem
ovin
g t
he
Lar
ge
Vill
age
fro
mfu
rth
er c
on
sid
erat
ion
in t
he
site
sele
ctio
n p
roce
ss?
Su
mm
ary
and
co
ncl
usi
on
sar
e a
num
ber
of e
colo
gyde
sign
atio
ns in
the
villa
gehi
nter
land
.The
vill
age
cont
ains
a
Spe
cial
Lan
dsca
pe A
rea
desi
gnat
ion
whi
ch w
ould
nee
d to
be
a co
nsid
erat
ion
in a
ny fu
ture
num
ber
of fa
cilit
ies
and
serv
ices
,sh
op, p
ost o
ffice
, pla
ce o
f wor
ship
,de
velo
pmen
ts a
t the
vill
age.
A la
rge
part
of t
he v
illag
e is
als
o de
sign
ated
publ
ic h
ouse
, rec
reat
iona
l pla
ying
with
in a
con
serv
atio
n ar
ea, a
ndfie
ld.T
he v
illag
e al
so b
enef
its fr
omth
ere
are
a nu
mbe
r of
eco
logy
a tr
ain
stat
ion.
The
re is
a p
rimar
yde
sign
atio
ns in
the
villa
gesc
hool
in th
e vi
llage
, alth
ough
the
hint
erla
nd.T
he v
illag
e co
ntai
ns a
scho
ol is
full
and
fore
cast
to re
mai
nnu
mbe
r of
faci
litie
s an
d se
rvic
es,
so, a
nd c
anno
t be
expa
nded
.The
rein
clud
ing
a pr
imar
y sc
hool
(w
ithar
e al
so p
ress
ures
on
prim
ary
capa
city
), a
sho
p/po
st o
ffice
, pla
ces
educ
atio
n ca
paci
ty in
Wes
tbur
yof
wor
ship
, caf
é, p
ublic
hou
se, h
alls
,w
hich
impa
cts
scho
ol c
apac
ity a
tre
crea
tion
grou
nd, a
nd G
P s
urge
ry.
Dilt
on M
arsh
. Fur
ther
dev
elop
men
tT
here
are
not
con
side
red
to b
e an
yat
Dilt
on M
arsh
is li
kely
to c
ause
an
over
ridin
g co
nstr
aint
s w
hich
wou
ldre
sult
in e
xclu
sion
of s
ites
at th
isvi
llage
at t
his
stag
e.is
sue
with
prim
ary
educ
atio
nca
paci
ty in
the
area
, and
hou
sing
allo
catio
ns s
houl
d no
t be
cons
ider
ed
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 31
Lar
ge
Vill
ages
Ass
essm
ent
Cri
teri
a
Dilt
on
Mar
shB
ratt
on
in th
is v
illag
e un
til th
e w
ider
prim
ary
educ
atio
n ca
paci
ty h
as b
een
addr
esse
d.
RE
MO
VE
TAK
E F
OR
WA
RD
Co
ncl
usi
on
:
Page 32 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
Appendix 2 Stage 4a: Selection of preferred sites - detailedmethodology
Work to this point has considered ‘SHLAA sites’. The purpose of this stage, which involves 5 Steps,is to select those ‘SHLAA sites’ that can be site allocations and produce a detailed site boundary andtext for each one’s inclusion in the draft Plan. The starting point is that all the ‘more sustainable sites’resulting from the assessment in stage 3 are capable of becoming site allocations.
For inclusion in the Plan, a site should demonstrate that it has ‘net sustainability benefits’ : that likelyadverse effects, after taking account of mitigation measures, are outweighed by likely positive effects,once measures to maximise those benefits have also been considered. However further work mayshow that adverse effects actually outweigh the positive ones, or be too marginal, in which case theyshould be rejected.
The Sustainability Appraisal (SA) identifies likely adverse and positive effects. Stage 4a involvesfurther work assessing only the site-specific effects (i.e. effects that are not common to most othersites) to clarify how they may be successfully mitigated or maximised. This work provides a moredetailed understanding of the site, including exact boundaries and a more accurate estimate of asite’s dwelling capacity. The work also involves specialist input from others, such as for landscapeand heritage sustainability objectives. It also judges the overall suitability of a site looking at effectsand measures in combination, for example costly mitigation measures may reduce the scope for adevelopment to provide a policy compliant level of affordable housing. This needs to be noted.Altogether, site suitability is considered at Step 1.
A site should also fit with each area strategy contained in the Core Strategy. Some proposals mayhelp to address issues identified in the Core Strategy but others may not. (Step 2 assesses thisaspect) A ‘SHLAA site’ at a large village should also be consistent with Core Policy 1 of the CoreStrategy. It should represent modest growth and help to support local jobs, community infrastructureand housing needs (Step 3 considers this).
Once more is known about how site options perform and how they fit with area strategy then it willbe possible to distinguish, if needed, between the better and less well performing sites amongst thoseconsidered the ‘more sustainable sites’ resulting from the Stage 3 . (Step 4 summarises Steps 1-3)
But the starting point is that all sites will go forward where there is evidence that they have net benefits,fit broadly with area strategy and are consistent with Core Policy 1. A judgement, however, mayneed to be made on rejecting one or more sites when:
the overall scale of development exceeds that proposed by each area strategy.if several site options at a large village suggest a scale of development that exceeds‘modest growth’ that is not supported by local needs.
If the more sustainable sites do not look like they will provide enough housing, it might be necessaryto look again at ‘less sustainable sites’ identified at Stage 3.
Each remaining site option should have a detailed site boundary and short description of site-specificmeasures, not common with any other site(22), that are necessary either to mitigate harm or maximisebenefits. This text would be capable of transfer to a draft Plan. (This is Step 5).
22 Each Community Area Topic Paper, Stage 4a Introduction lists generic mitigation measures that can generally be assumed to becommon to all sites.
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 33
Stage 4a is carried out in five steps. Steps 1-4 are carried out for each of the ‘more sustainablesites’ recommended by the Stage 3 SA results. Only in exceptional circumstances should it benecessary for further assessment of ‘less sustainable sites’ (see above). Step 5 considers thearea of search as a whole, selects and justifies the selection of preferred sites and concludeswith a set of draft proposals.
Step 1 (1) transforms a SHLAA site into a possible draft proposal by a more detailed assessmentof the effects identified in Stage 3; and (2) provides a measure of the net sustainability benefitsof each site.
Step 2 assesses how well a site may contribute to the relevant area strategy for the widercommunity area in terms of how much it might contribute to housing requirements, deliver thevision for the area or address specific local issues.
Step 3 is a specific assessment of whether a site at a large village is consistent with Core Policy1; that it would constitute modest growth and meet local needs, including local housing needs
Step 4 is a summary conclusion for each site.
Step 5 considers all the sites together and is the selection and rejection of sites. All sites thathave satisfied Steps 1-3 would be taken forward. The step compares the total dwellings thatare provided by the pool of sites to indicative residual requirements. Where necesssary, it selectsand justifies site options that need to be rejected because the overall scales of developmentexceed that proposed by each area strategy.
if several site options at a large village suggest too much development then a site may needto be rejected.
The conclusion gives an individual justification for a site being rejected. Generally, it should bethe site option(s) that performs the least well using evidence from Step 4.
Steps 1-5 are recorded in each community area paper using the following templates and cue ordecision aiding questions.
Page 34 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
ST
EP
1 –
PO
TE
NTA
L S
ITE
SU
ITA
BIL
ITY
DA
QC
rite
ria
Can
sit
e-sp
ecif
ic a
dve
rse
effe
cts
be
mit
igat
ed?
If s
o h
ow
?1.
Iden
tify
each
site
-spe
cific
adv
erse
effe
ct in
the
SA
2.D
escr
ibe
the
mea
sure
s an
d ho
w th
ese
miti
gate
the
effe
cts
3.A
re th
ere
mea
sure
s es
sent
ial t
o al
low
dev
elop
men
t to
proc
eed
If so
des
crib
e ho
w th
ese
mea
sure
s ar
ere
ferr
ed to
in th
e P
lan
text
(1-
2 se
nten
ces)
4.D
o th
ey a
ffect
the
capa
city
of t
he s
ite?
5.D
o th
ey c
hang
e th
e bo
unda
ry to
the
site
Con
sult
as a
ppro
pria
te w
ith th
e re
leva
nt c
onsu
ltee
asso
ciat
ed w
ith e
ach
SA
obj
ectiv
e
The
con
vers
e to
the
abov
e. O
ppor
tuni
ties
shou
ld b
e ex
plor
ed, w
ith re
leva
nt c
onsu
ltees
if n
eces
sary
, to
max
imis
ebe
nefit
s w
hils
t ens
urin
g th
at th
ey a
re n
eces
sary
, dire
ctly
-rel
ated
and
pro
port
iona
te to
the
prop
osal
.H
ow
wel
l sit
e-sp
ecif
ic p
osi
tive
effe
ct b
e re
alis
ed?
A s
umm
ary
desc
riptio
n of
how
veh
icle
acc
ess
can
be a
chie
ved,
how
eas
ily a
nd if
dev
elop
men
t wou
ld c
reat
eco
nges
tion
or s
afet
y pr
oble
ms?
Ho
w a
cces
sib
le is
th
e si
te?
A d
escr
iptio
n of
how
wel
l the
site
is lo
cate
d in
rel
atio
n to
loca
l ser
vice
s an
d em
ploy
men
t in
term
s of
acc
ess
byal
tern
ativ
es to
the
priv
ate
car.
An
over
all c
oncl
usio
n as
to w
heth
er m
itiga
tion
mea
sure
s ar
e re
ason
able
and
ach
ieva
ble.
Ove
rall
suit
abili
ty
Site
cap
acity
is s
tate
d ta
king
acc
ount
of m
itiga
tion
mea
sure
s an
d th
is is
use
d as
the
basi
s of
ass
essm
ent f
orst
eps
2-5.
No
pote
ntia
l site
s ar
e re
ject
ed a
t thi
s st
age.
Mos
t site
s w
ill h
owev
er ‘g
o fo
rwar
d’ to
sel
ectio
n, g
iven
the
SA
conc
lusi
on. H
owev
er, i
t wou
ld n
eed
to b
e no
ted
that
a ‘m
oder
ate
adve
rse
effe
ct’ t
hat c
anno
t be
fully
miti
gate
dw
ill n
eed
subs
tant
ial b
enef
its to
out
wei
gh it
in o
rder
for
such
a s
ite to
be
allo
cate
d.
Whe
re th
ere
is m
ore
than
one
site
at a
set
tlem
ent,
it is
impo
rtan
t tha
t thi
s se
ctio
n hi
ghlig
hts
each
one
’s p
artic
ular
stre
ngth
s an
d w
eakn
esse
s.
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 35
ST
EP
2 –
PO
TE
NT
IAL
SIT
E F
IT W
ITH
AR
EA
ST
RA
TE
GY
Ans
wer
s ar
e no
t exp
ecte
d to
be
in d
epth
. It i
s im
port
ant t
o no
te w
here
site
opt
ions
con
flict
or u
nder
min
e as
pect
s of
the
stra
tegy
or m
ay h
ave
a sp
ecifi
cco
nseq
uenc
e pa
rtic
ular
to th
at s
ite.T
hese
are
the
two
mai
n as
pect
s th
at w
ill in
fluen
ce w
heth
er o
r no
t a s
ite is
sel
ecte
d.
DA
QC
rite
ria
Wha
t % o
f the
res
idua
l ind
icat
ive
dwel
ling
requ
irem
ent d
oes
the
site
del
iver
.S
cale
of d
evel
opm
ent v
req
uire
men
t
How
wel
l doe
s th
e si
te p
rom
ote
the
visi
on fo
r th
e ar
ea (
WC
S:‘
How
will
the
?? C
omm
unity
Are
ach
ange
by
2026
?)?
Fit
with
are
a vi
sion
How
wou
ld d
evel
opm
ent o
f the
site
add
ress
issu
es id
entif
ied
in th
e A
rea
Str
ateg
y?A
ddre
sses
spe
cific
issu
es
(WC
S r
equi
res
deve
lopm
ent p
ropo
sals
to d
emon
stra
te h
ow th
ese
issu
es a
nd c
onsi
dera
tions
will
be a
ddre
ssed
.)
Page 36 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
ST
EP
3: L
AR
GE
VIL
LA
GE
PO
TE
NT
IAL
SIT
E F
IT W
ITH
CO
RE
PO
LIC
Y 1
For
con
text
als
o re
fer
to t
he s
tage
2 w
ork
that
has
alre
ady
been
und
erta
ken
on la
rge
villa
ges
suita
bilit
y.
App
endi
x 6
has
the
met
hodo
logy
use
d at
stag
e 2
and
ther
e ar
e co
mpl
eted
tem
plat
es fo
r ea
ch c
omm
unity
are
a re
mai
nder
. (T
hese
are
als
o su
mm
aris
ed in
topi
c pa
pers
). A
nsw
ers
are
need
edfo
r al
l DA
Q q
uest
ions
.
DA
QC
rite
ria
Is th
ere
capa
city
in th
e lo
cal p
rimar
y sc
hool
(s)?
Nee
ds c
an b
e m
et a
t the
loca
l prim
ary
scho
ol
Pro
port
iona
te in
crea
se in
the
tota
l siz
e of
a s
ettle
men
t and
con
tinui
ty w
ith p
ast r
ates
of
deve
lopm
ent
Mod
est s
cale
of d
evel
opm
ent
Is th
ere
evid
ence
to s
how
that
a N
eigh
bour
hood
Pla
n (N
P)
will
add
ress
loca
l hou
sing
nee
dsor
that
ther
e w
ill n
ot b
e an
NP
?M
eetin
g Lo
cal H
ousi
ng N
eeds
Cou
ld L
ocal
Hou
sing
Nee
ds b
e m
et b
y an
exc
eptio
n sc
hem
e un
der
polic
y C
P44
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 37
ST
EP
4: S
ITE
SU
MM
AR
Y
Ove
rall
conc
lusi
on to
the
abov
e na
rrat
ive:
indi
catin
g th
e fo
rm, e
xten
t and
cer
tain
ty o
f net
ben
efits
, sta
ting
whe
ther
or
not t
he s
iteco
nfor
ms
to C
ore
Pol
icy
1 (f
or a
rur
al s
ettle
men
t) a
nd h
ow c
entr
al a
pro
posa
l may
(or
may
not
be)
, ind
ivid
ually
or
in c
ombi
natio
n,to
ach
ievi
ng th
e ar
ea v
isio
n se
t in
the
core
str
ateg
y an
d in
add
ress
ing
any
iden
tifie
d ke
y is
sues
(par
ticul
arly
for t
owns
and
prin
cipa
lse
ttlem
ents
)
Co
ncl
usi
on
and
su
mm
ary
of
step
s 1-
3
Sum
mar
y sh
ould
incl
ude
an o
vera
ll st
atem
ent o
f sus
tain
abili
ty n
et b
enef
it, u
sing
the
follo
win
g as
a g
uide
Tab
le 2
.1
Just
ific
atio
nC
rite
ria
Ove
rall
sust
ain
abili
ty
...It
is n
ot c
erta
in th
at a
site
is d
evel
opab
le (
poss
ibly
insu
rmou
ntab
lein
fras
truc
ture
obs
tacl
e (e
.gl.
not p
hysi
cally
pos
sibl
e to
enl
arge
loca
lpr
imar
y sc
hool
), n
o re
alis
tic s
afe
vehi
cle
acce
ss, s
igni
fican
t new
cons
trai
nt)
A s
igni
fican
t neg
ativ
e ad
vers
e ef
fect
resu
lts fr
om m
ore
deta
iled
asse
ssm
ent
beca
use
...
Mar
gina
l
... It
is n
ot c
erta
in th
at p
ositi
ve e
ffect
s w
ill o
utw
eigh
neg
ativ
e on
es (e
.g.
site
will
be
subj
ect t
o H
RA
app
ropr
iate
ass
essm
ent)
... th
e sc
ope
for
affo
rdab
le h
ousi
ng is
lim
ited
The
re a
re s
ever
al m
inor
adv
erse
effe
cts
all s
trai
ght f
orw
ard
to m
itiga
te b
utbe
nefit
s ar
e lim
ited
beca
use
...
Min
or
... c
onst
rain
ts s
ever
ely
limit
the
prop
ortio
n of
dev
elop
men
t acc
epta
ble
on th
e si
te
... d
evel
opm
ent a
dds
to p
ress
ures
on
loca
l inf
rast
ruct
ure
exce
pt fo
rC
IL c
ontr
ibut
ions
...th
ere
is s
cope
for
affo
rdab
le h
ousi
ngA
dver
se e
ffect
s ar
e m
inor
and
will
be
reso
lved
by
stra
ight
forw
ard
miti
gatio
nan
d ...
Mod
erat
e
... if
nec
essa
ry, d
evel
opm
ent c
an h
elp
to a
ddre
ss lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
eca
paci
ty is
sues
ove
r an
d ab
ove
CIL
Page 38 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
Just
ific
atio
nC
rite
ria
Ove
rall
sust
ain
abili
ty
...th
ere
is g
ood
scop
e fo
r af
ford
able
hou
sing
and
ther
e is
evi
denc
e of
need
Min
or a
dver
se e
ffect
s ar
e cl
early
outw
eigh
ed b
y po
sitiv
e be
nefit
s an
d ...
Goo
d
... d
evel
opm
ent w
ill p
rovi
de lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e on
site
, hel
ping
toad
dres
s lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e ca
paci
ty is
sues
ove
r an
d ab
ove
CIL
...sc
ale
of d
evel
opm
ent i
s no
t lim
ited
or d
epen
dent
upo
n re
solv
ing
impo
rtan
t con
stra
ints
...m
inor
adv
erse
effe
cts
are
clea
rly o
utw
eigh
ed b
y po
sitiv
e be
nefit
sD
evel
opm
ent a
ddre
sses
pos
itive
ly a
spec
ific
issu
e id
entif
ied
in th
e ar
east
rate
gy a
nd ..
.
Sig
nific
ant
... th
ere
is g
ood
scop
e fo
r af
ford
able
hou
sing
and
ther
e is
evi
denc
eof
nee
d
... d
evel
opm
ent w
ill p
rovi
de lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e on
site
, hel
ping
toad
dres
s lo
cal i
nfra
stru
ctur
e ca
paci
ty is
sues
ove
r an
d ab
ove
CIL
... s
cale
of d
evel
opm
ent i
s no
t lim
ited
or d
epen
dent
upo
n re
solv
ing
impo
rtan
t con
stra
ints
• WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version • • Page 39
Ste
p 5
: C
om
mu
nit
y A
rea/
set
tlem
ents
CO
NC
LU
SIO
NS
DA
QC
rite
ria
Rec
ord
tota
l dw
ellin
gs th
at a
re p
rovi
ded
by th
e po
ol o
f pre
ferr
ed s
ites
v in
dica
tive
requ
irem
ents
. Do
thes
e re
sults
fit w
ithth
e sp
atia
l str
ateg
y in
dica
tive
requ
irem
ents
?F
it w
ith s
patia
l str
ateg
y
Is it
nec
essa
ry to
red
uce
the
num
ber
of s
ites?
Is it
nec
essa
ry to
incl
ude
‘less
sus
tain
able
site
s’?
If so
whi
ch o
nes
and
why
, rep
eatin
g st
eps
1-4
abov
e fo
r th
ese
site
s?
Sho
uld
any
pote
ntia
l site
s be
rej
ecte
d be
caus
e ad
vers
e ef
fect
s ou
twei
gh th
e be
nefit
s?S
elec
tion
of p
refe
rred
site
sS
houl
d an
y po
tent
ial s
ites
be r
emov
ed a
t a la
rge
villa
ge in
ord
er to
com
ply
with
CP
1 be
caus
e
they
exc
eed
‘mod
est g
row
th’ f
or w
hich
ther
e is
no
loca
l jus
tific
atio
nW
here
ther
e is
mor
e th
an o
ne p
oten
tial s
ite a
t a v
illag
e, s
houl
d on
e or
mor
e si
tes
be r
emov
ed to
fit w
ith C
ore
Pol
icy
1. If
so
whi
ch o
ne(s
) an
d w
hy th
ose?
Sho
uld
any
pote
ntia
l site
s at
Mar
ket T
owns
or
Prin
cipa
l Set
tlem
ents
be
reta
ined
in o
rder
to p
rovi
de s
uffic
ient
hou
sing
eve
nth
ough
bec
ause
adv
erse
effe
cts
outw
eigh
the
bene
fits?
Just
ify th
e se
lect
ion
of s
ites
base
d on
pre
ferr
ing
thos
e re
mai
ning
site
s th
at p
rodu
ce th
e m
ost n
et b
enef
its.
Pre
ferr
ed s
ites
shou
ld fi
t wel
l with
the
spat
ial s
trat
egy.
Site
s at
Mar
ket T
owns
and
Prin
cipa
l Set
tlem
ents
will
fit w
ith th
ese
bein
g th
e fo
cus
for
grow
th. L
arge
vill
ages
sho
uld
only
acc
ept m
odes
t gro
wth
to m
eet l
ocal
nee
ds (
as a
sses
sed
for
each
site
at s
tep
3 an
d as
abo
ve).
Sum
mar
ise
the
loca
l jus
tific
atio
n fo
r gr
eate
r sc
ales
of d
evel
opm
ent t
han
mod
est g
row
th a
t a L
arge
Vill
age.
The
rol
e of
a s
ite a
t a L
ocal
Ser
vice
Cen
tre
will
als
o ne
ed to
be
reco
gnis
ed.
Page 40 • • WHSAP Topic Paper 2 - July 2018 Submission Version •
This document was published by the Spatial Planning team, Wiltshire Council,Economic Development and Planning Services.
For further information please visit the following website:
http://www.wiltshire.gov.uk/wiltshsgsiteallocationsplan.htm
Information about Wiltshire Council services can be made available in other formats (such as large print or audio) and languages on request. Please contact the council on 0300 456 0100, by textphone on (01225) 712500 or by email on [email protected].