Loading document...
1.1 Sites will be considered against the questions below. Some sites may initially fail Stage 1, but the proposed land use may still be acceptable in planning policy terms when examined in detail. Examples include Open Space for particular purposes, Cemeteries or other Civic or Infrastructure use. Where policy allows, an exception may be made in these instances for a fuller assessment report to be prepared.
If the answers to both questions are ‘no’, and there are no policy exceptions to support further consideration of the site in the Draft Plan, the site fails stage 1 of the SAF1. The evidence source will be the published draft Settlement Boundary Maps. The relevant policy provision is Strategic Policy 2 and Appendix 3 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 (the Strategic Plan) on ‘Settlement Pattern’.
If the answer to PSQ. 3 is ‘yes’, the response to either PSQ. 1 or PSQ. 2 may change at a later date. The site should be flagged as requiring a review of the site assessment in this instance.
PSQ. 4 – Is the site within a designated area that presents a danger of pollution to the water supply? Yes No
PSQ.5 – Is the site situated within a Green Gap? Yes No
Exception Test: Is there sufficient reason/evidence to consider allowing an exception will be made for the proposed land use? Yes No
Reason:
2.1 The detailed planning criteria are designed using a colour based scoring system. This will allow a clear visual representation and summary of the ‘pros and cons’ of each site.
2.2 The scoring system for the first nine planning criteria (Stage 2 - Part A) includes a box that denotes a critical constraint. The concept of critical constraints is used as a trigger to identify those sites where the impact of development on the site or the impact of the site’s characteristics on potential development, is such that development would not be acceptable, and mitigation or compensation is not possible or appropriate. Where a critical constraint is identified, sites will be deemed unsuitable and screened out, unless there is a policy exception to be made. Where no critical constraints are identified, or where a policy exception can be made, assessments reports will continue to the end of Stage 2 (Part B) and undergo Stage 3 assessment.
3.1 It is important to consider compatibility of adjacent land uses. This is in order to avoid allocating sites where vulnerable members of the public would be present, for example in areas where noise, odours, light pollution and disturbance issues etc. from employment uses are likely to affect educational and medical establishments or residential properties. Land for Special Industrial and General Industrial uses will be examined particularly carefully and may require infrastructure consultation zones2 to be identified. Issues relating to noise, air and light pollution are addressed by Policies of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan. When assessing a proposed employment use against this criterion, it could score lower if it is close to existing housing, and vice versa.
3.2 The relevant policy for this criteria is General Policy 2 of the Strategic Plan 2016.
3.3 If the site is located within a safety buffer zone, the lowest score should be assigned. - 3.4 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green|The site would not result in residential or other vulnerable uses being in close proximity to incompatible uses (no mitigation is necessary)| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|The site would result in residential or other vulnerable uses being in close proximity to uses which are only compatible with residential uses with mitigation, and such mitigation is realistic| | |Red<br><br>|Not used| | |Critical Constraint|Existing uses on surrounding land are highly incompatible and cannot be made compatible through mitigation measures. Critical Constraint applies. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
Assessor Comments:
4.1 A number of installations and existing land uses on the Island represent a constraint on development in their vicinity because of health and safety considerations. These are essential Island facilities and include LPG and petroleum storage. In addition, some land is known to be contaminated by previous uses. However, it may be possible to remediate the land to make it suitable for some forms of development.
4.2 In accordance with Strategic Plan Environment Policy 26 (and supporting text) successful remediation is where the development site is free of contamination which may constitute a hazard to occupiers or potential users of the development or land, and precautions can be taken to ensure that contaminants cannot escape from the site which may cause airborne or waterborne pollution or pollution of nearby land.
4.3 The possible scores are as set out below3.
| |Green<br><br>|Site and surrounding land is contaminated and could be successfully remediated through development for the proposed use| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Site and surrounding land was either:<br><br>• previously hazardous or contaminated but has been successfully and fully remediated, or<br>• unlikely to be hazardous or contaminated.<br>| | |Orange<br><br>|Not used| | |Red<br><br>|Not used| | |Critical Constraint|The site is hazardous/contaminated, or has the potential to be hazardous/contaminated, and cannot be satisfactorily addressed as part of the development (i.e. mitigation/remediation). Critical Constraint applies4. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
Assessor Comments:
5.1 This is a new detailed planning criteria, and forms an addition to the 2017 framework (as used for the Area Plan for the East).
5.2 Minerals Policy 1 and paragraph 12.2.1 of the Strategic Plan 2016 recognises the need to ensure an adequate supply of minerals to meet our needs. The Island has a long history of mineral extraction, and this has enabled the Island to be self-sufficient, when sourcing mineral supplies. Maintaining self-sufficiency in this regard will contribute to the long term sustainability of the Island.
5.3 Mineral Reserves have been mapped on the All Sites Map for the North and West, and the required buffer distances are shown on the Infrastructure Constraints Map.
5.4 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|The site is not located on a future Minerals Reserve.| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|Not used| | |Red<br><br>|Not used| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|The site is located on a future Minerals Reserve. Critical Constraint applies. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
Assessor Comments:
6.1 Development should respect the character of the landscape by ensuring that high quality landscapes are maintained and development is compatible in scale and design. The relevant policies are General Policy 2 and Environment Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016.
6.2 The Landscape Character Assessment (2008)5 provides an Island-wide landscape and coastal quality assessment and has identified landscape character ‘types’ and ‘areas’ and determined their sensitivity to development. This classification has been used to inform criterion Q.4.
6.3 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Development of the site would improve the landscape character, for example by redeveloping previously developed land| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Development of the site would fit with the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape| | |Orange<br><br>|Development would have some impact on the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape, but the proposal (including potential mitigation) would not result in the partial loss of any key features| | |Red<br><br>|Development of the site would not fit the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape, resulting in the partial loss of one or more key features| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|The development does not fit the scale, landform and pattern of the landscape, resulting in the total loss of, or major alteration to one or more key features. Critical Constraint applies. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
Assessor Comments:
7.1 The Strategic Plan gives protection to the countryside and ecology for its own sake. The relevant policies are Environment Policy 4 and 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. Statutory designations will be identified on the Environmental Constraints Map.
7.2 The final constraints map may also identify sites which do not have a statutory designation or are recognised by law, but are considered to have high wildlife value and protection is necessary under relevant agreements. Sites may also be identified which have the potential for ‘interest’ but have not yet been surveyed in detail.
7.3 In developing the Area Plan, a precautionary approach will be adopted when assessing sites and considering their nature conservation interest, including using available information and considering existing designations.
7.4 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Site and adjoining area is unlikely to have any nature conservation interest| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|Adjacent land (but not the site) has potential nature conservation interest - including designation in an existing Local Plan or the 1982 Development Plan.| | |Red<br><br>|Potential nature conservation interest has been identified on the site – including designation in an existing Local Plan or the 1982 Development Plan.| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|The site or adjacent area is a nationally or internationally designated site (RAMSAR or Area of Special Scientific Interest), Marine Nature Reserve, National Nature Reserve, Emerald Site, Bird Sanctuary or Area of Special Protection. Critical Constraint applies. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
Assessor Comments:
8.1 Whilst there is a general presumption against the demolition of Registered Buildings, new development can affect the historic setting to varying degrees. The effect of new development on historic buildings and Conservation Areas will be dependent on the importance of the setting of each building related to the function that it performed historically and the particular impact on the Conservation Area. Deciding on the magnitude of the effect will inevitably involve a degree of judgement.
8.2 The relevant policies are set out in Environment Policies 30 – 36 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016 and the reference for assessment is the Environmental Constraints Map and the Planning Map Search.
8.3 The possible scores are as set out below. The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Development of site will have no adverse effect on a Registered Building and its setting or a Conservation Area| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|Development of site likely to have a minor effect on a Registered Building and its setting or a Conservation Area| | |Red<br><br>|Development of site likely to have a moderate effect on a Registered Building or its setting or a Conservation Area| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|Development of the site is likely to have a major effect on a Registered Building (including its setting), or a conservation area.<br><br>Critical Constraint applies. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
Assessor Comments:
9.1 Archaeology is an important part of the Island’s national heritage and needs to be protected against damage or disturbance that could result from new development. The relevant policies are set out in Strategic Policy 4 and Environment Policies 6, 40 and 41 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016, and the reference for assessment is the Historic Environment Record.
9.2 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|There are no Ancient Monuments on site and there is very low potential for archaeological interest (for example due to previous disturbance, demonstrated through investigation or raised as a constraint by MNH)| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|Not used| | |Red<br><br>|There is potential for archaeological interest on the site (which may include some evidence of past 'finds' on the site or in the general area)| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|The site is an Ancient Monument. Critical Constraint applies. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
Assessor Comments:
10.1 The Strategic Plan indicates development will not be supported on land subject to unreasonable risk of erosion or flooding (General Policy 2). It seeks to prevent the loss of natural flood plain, guide development away from areas at risk of flooding, and ensure that development that does take place is safe. It notes that the development of sites which may flood can lead to problems not only for the new development itself, but also for adjacent land. Environment Policies 10 – 13 of the Strategic Plan are also relevant.
10.2 Flooding maps are available in relation to coastal, fluvial, and surface water flooding. The reference for assessment is the National Strategy on Sea Defences, Flooding, and Coastal Erosion (Overview Map and Management Areas, including Flooding and Coastal Erosion Predicted Risk Hotspot Map), and the Infrastructure Constraints Map. The coastal and fluvial maps are well established and were used to inform the preparation of the SAF. The surface water flood maps indicate a large area at risk - they will be used to highlight the need for separate more detailed assessment at a later stage. For the purposes of applying the SAF, the Coastal Flood Zone is the area at 1 in 200 risk and Fluvial Flood Zone is defined as 1 in 100 risk (both plus Climate Change).
10.3 Coastal flooding does not result in lower scores for sites within existing settlement boundaries, as this reflects the nature of settlement patterns and also that Coastal flooding can more easily be mitigated without displacing the impact. Brownfield sites within Fluvial Flood Zones within existing settlement boundaries are scored ‘yellow’, and so higher than sites outside existing settlement boundaries which are not within Fluvial or Coastal Flood Zones. This is on the basis that redevelopment of existing buildings brings opportunities to review how the site is designed and used in order to reduce the risk of flooding, using flood risk assessment as a tool to assess flood risk and explore available solutions. By way of example, measures could include a less vulnerable use or improvements to the standard of defence for occupants. - 10.4 The definition of previously developed land located within Appendix 1 of the Strategic Plan 2016 is as follows:-
‘Previously developed land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure, including the curtilage of the developed land and any associated fixed surface infrastructure’.
The definition includes defence buildings but excludes:-
There is no presumption that land that is previously developed is necessary suitablefor housing development nor that the whole of the curtilage should be developed.
10.5 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Brownfield or Greenfield Site inside the existing settlement boundaries and outside the Fluvial Flood Zone (irrespective of whether inside the Coastal Flood Zone)| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Brownfield site inside the existing settlement boundaries and inside the Fluvial Flood Zone (irrespective of whether inside the Coastal Flood Zone)| | |Orange<br><br>|Brownfield or Greenfield Site outside the existing settlement boundaries and outside both the Fluvial and Coastal Flood Zones| | |Red<br><br>|Greenfield site inside the existing settlement boundaries and inside the Fluvial Flood Zone (irrespective of whether inside the Coastal Flood Zone)| | |Critical Constraint|The site is<br><br>a) outside the existing settlement boundaries and inside either the Fluvial or Coastal Flood Zones;<br>b) located within 175 metres of a Coastal Erosion Zone6, or<br>c) located within a Coastline Management Zone.<br><br><br>Critical Constraint applies. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
|Further Comments by DOI<br><br>| | |---|---|
Assessor Comments:
Do any critical constraints apply? Yes Consider Exception Test No Proceed to assess the site in respect of questions Q.9–Q. 18 (Stage 2 Part B)
Exception Test: Does the site fail any Question (Q1-8), but there is sufficient reason/evidence to consider allowing an exception will be made for the proposed land use?
Yes Proceed to assess the site in respect of questions Q.9 – Q. 18 (Stage 2 Part B)
No No further assessment is required.
N/A
Reason:
Summary Stage 2 Part A
11.1 The policy framework of the Strategic Plan recognises the importance of agriculture to the rural economy and society, and aims to protect its commercial viability and the principle of self-sufficiency in food production. The relevant policy for this criteria is Environment Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan 2016.
11.2 The Agricultural Land Use Capability Study7 and accompanying Soil Use Capability Maps for the North and West show how the quality of soils varies across the Island, using a classification system of 1 to 5. The best and most versatile agricultural land falls within classes 1 and 2 and there is a general presumption against its release for development, as reflected in Environment Policy 14 of the Strategic Plan (loss only permitted where there is an overriding need).
11.3 The sites will be assessed against the Soil Use Capability Maps for the North and West. - 11.4 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Previously developed land with limited agricultural value or marked as Urban on the Agricultural Soils Land Use Capability Map| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Soil in the area supports low levels of crop production/agricultural use/soil quality falls into Classes 4, 4/5 and 5| | |Orange<br><br>|Soil in the area supports moderate levels of crop production/agricultural use/soil quality falls into Class 3, 3/4 and 4/3| | |Red<br><br>|Soil in the area supports high levels of crop production/agricultural use/soil quality is Class 2/3 and 3/2| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|Soil in the area supports high levels of crop production/agricultural use/soil quality is Class 1 or Class 2 Critical Constraint applies. The site is unsuitable and should be screened out.|
Assessor Comments:
12.1 The relevant policy for this criteria is Strategic Policy 1 and Environment Policy 43 of the Strategic Plan 2016. The first part of Strategic Policy 18 sets out that “Development should make the best use of resources by a) optimising the use of previously developed land, redundant buildings, unused and under-used land and buildings and reusing scarce indigenous building materials…”
12.2 The reference for assessment is the definition of ‘previously developed land’ in Appendix 1 of the Strategic Plan 2016.
12.4 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|The site is comprised entirely or predominantly of previously developed land9| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|Not used| | |Red<br><br>|The site is comprised entirely or predominantly of greenfield land| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
Assessor Comments:
13.1 This is a new detailed planning criteria, and forms an addition to the 2017 framework (as used for the Area Plan for the East).
13.2 The relevant policy is set out in Environment Policy 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. New development in existing settlements must be designed to take account of the particular character and identity of the settlement, in terms of buildings and landscape features of the immediate locality. Inappropriate backland development, and the removal of open or green spaces which contribute to the visual amenity and sense of place of a particular area will not be permitted.
13.3 Open or green spaces which are to be preserved will be identified in the Area Plans. Reference may also be had to defining features within settlements, as identified in the Landscape Character Assessment 2008.
13.4 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Development of the site could preserve or enhance the character and identity of an existing settlement.| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|Not used| | |Red<br><br>|Development of the site could result in<br><br>• inappropriate backland development, and/or<br>• the removal of open spaces or important landscape settings that contribute to the visual amenity, sense of place and overall settlement character.<br>| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
Assessor Comments:
14.1 Decisions in respect of development sites should be sensitive to the impact on views from valued landscapes, urban areas, footpaths and recreational areas. Ideally, new development should be compatible with surrounding buildings and avoid obstructing prominent views.
14.2 The relevant policies are set out in Environment Policy 6 and 24 and Appendix 5 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. The assessment will be informed by the Landscape Character Assessment (2008), but will also involve professional judgment, following a site visit.
14.3 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Development would have no adverse impact on visual amenity as viewed from adjacent land uses such as residential areas, public footpaths or recreational areas| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Development would have an impact on visual amenity as viewed from adjacent land uses such as residential areas, public footpaths or recreational areas but could be mitigated through design and layout| | |Orange<br><br>|Development would have an impact on visual amenity as viewed from adjacent land uses such as residential areas, public footpaths or recreational areas and could not be easily mitigated through design and layout| | |Red<br><br>|Development would have a significant impact on visual amenity as viewed from adjacent land uses such as residential areas, public footpaths or recreational areas| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
Assessor Comments:
15.1 The assessment of this impact is based on Tree Protection Policy, as published by DEFA in January 2021. Four categories of sensitivity are identified that require a detailed arboricultural assessment are set out below.
Categories of Sensitivity Registered trees Groups of trees comprising of over 5 large trees or 30 medium trees One single large tree Medium tree within a conservation area or built up area
15.2 The relevant policies are set out in General Policy 2 and Environment Policies 3 and 42 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. Reference will be made to the Island Environment Map.
15.3 The possible scores are as set out below:
| |Green<br><br>|Site does not contain any trees| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|Site contains trees and the views of the arboricultural officer should be sought| | |Red<br><br>|Site does contain trees that are registered or in a conservation area.| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
Assessor Comments:
16.1 This criterion seeks to make best use of the existing road network, to promote a more integrated transport network with the aim to: minimise journeys, especially by private car, make best use of public transport, not adversely affect highway safety and encourage pedestrian movement. A primary function of the Department of Infrastructure is to provide an accessible, safe, sustainable and resilient highway network for movement of goods and people. The relevant planning policies are set out in Strategic Policy 1, Strategic Policy 10 and Transport Policies 1, 2, 4 and 7 of the Strategic Plan 2016.
16.2 The relevant Department of Infrastructure guidance is ‘Manual for Manx Roads - which recognises the concepts of Place, Movement and Access . This criteria attempts to record the likely impact of site development on the local streets, the wider network and key junctions, particularly those that already suffer congestion. Some sites identified may need additional highway modeling later in the Plan process.
16.3 The possible scores are as set out below12.
| |Green<br><br>|Development of the site will have a low level or minor impact in terms of an increase in the volume of and/or nature of additional vehicular traffic movements at site level or on the local network. No need for new direct access to a Primary or District link.| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Development of the site will have a moderate impact in terms of an increase in the volume of and/or nature of vehicular traffic movements at site level or in the local area, including some impact on the wider network/junctions.<br><br>Improvements on the network including links/junctions practical and realistic in the short term within the plan period. No need for new direct access to a Primary or District link.| | |Orange<br><br>|Development of the site will have a significant impact in terms of an increase in the volume of and/or nature of vehicular traffic movements at site level or on the local or wider highway network, potentially affecting key junctions which may already be congested.<br><br>Category appropriate if improvements to mitigate effects on the network/junctions not practicable in the plan period.|
| | |Category appropriate where there is some uncertainty about achieving safe access and egress to the site. Category appropriate for any site that would have a significant impact and require new direct access to Primary or District link.| |---|---|---| | |Red<br><br>|The site will have a significant adverse impact in terms of an increase in the volume of and/or nature of vehicular traffic movements at site level or on the local and wider highway network and compound congestion issues in the local/wider area or at key junctions. Mitigating the impacts is not possible or not practicable in the plan period.<br><br>Category appropriate where there is clear uncertainty about achieving safe access and egress to the site. Category appropriate for any site that would have a significant adverse impact and require new direct access to Primary or District link| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
17.1 This criterion assesses the potential to travel by bus, thereby reducing car usage and resulting greenhouse gas emissions as well as local environmental and social impacts associated with car use and road construction. Currently, the Island is served by both timetabled bus services and also by the Connect Villages service in more rural areas. For timetabled bus services, the distances used are based on advice from Bus Vannin (DOI). When assessing a site which is large enough to accommodate a spine road which could be designed and function as a bus route, the distances should be measured from the edge of the site nearest the bus route. For smaller sites the distance should be measured from the middle of the site. The Connect Villages Service is a demand responsive minibus service that responds to a passenger request for a service in advance13. Please note that the rail network on the Island is primarily a tourism and leisure facility and is therefore excluded from the assessment.
17.2 The relevant policies are set out in Strategic Policy 10, Business Policy 2, Recreation Policy 4 and Transport Policies 1 and 8 of the Strategic Plan 2016.
17.3 The need for a site to have an internal bus route on completion of a development scheme or a new bus stop added to the existing highway network close to the site will be considered as part of any Assessment Report. It is assumed that the option to cycle or walk is widely available and would therefore not help to distinguish between sites. It should also be noted that this
criterion does not consider proximity to community services and facilities; this is covered within criterion Q.5.
17.4 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|The site is within 200m of a bus route with a peak time service every 30 minutes| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|The site is within 400m of a bus route with an at least hourly peak time service| | |Orange<br><br>|The site benefits from the Village Services Connect Service.| | |Red<br><br>|There is no public transport service available for this site.| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
Assessor Comments:
18.1 The relevant policy is set out in Recreation Policy 4 of the Strategic Plan 2016. The reference for assessment relies on distances to community facilities, as shown on the Local Information Map.
18.2 The following points should be noted.
18.3 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Site is located within 1 km walking distance of 4 or 5 of the services/facilities listed above and is within 1 km of a school bus route.| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Site is located within 1 km walking distance of 2 or 3 of the services/facilities listed above.| | |Orange<br><br>|Site is located within 1 km walking distance of 1 of the services/facilities listed above| | |Red<br><br>|Site is more than 1 km walking distance from all of the services/facilities listed above| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
Assessor Comments:
19.1 Open space is defined in the Strategic Plan 2016 as land used for recreational purposes, both formal and informal, including amenity space whether privately or publicly owned.14 It includes sports pitches, children’s play space and amenity space.
19.2 The scoring system to be used for this criterion is based on Recreation Policy 2 of the Isle of Man Strategic Plan 2016. This includes a presumption against development that will result in the loss of open space unless alternative provision can be made, or there would be an overall community gain and the effect on open space would not be significant. Areas where there is limited existing open space should be prioritised for open space provision. The reference for assessment is Appendix 6 of the Strategic Plan.
19.3 For the purposes of this exercise Open Space shall be taken to be:
19.4 For the purposes of this exercise Open Space shall not be taken to be: verges, woodlands, the seashore, Nature Conservation Areas, allotments, golf courses, water used for recreation, commercial entertainment complexes, sports halls, and car parks.
19.5 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Development would not result in the loss of open space| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Not used| | |Orange<br><br>|Development would result in the loss of open space in an area that is currently well-served| | |Red<br><br>|Development would result in the loss of open space in an area where there is limited existing open space| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
Assessor Comments:
20.1 The relevant policy is set out in Transport Policy 1 of the Strategic Plan 2016. The reference for assessment relies on distances to identified existing or future Active Travel Routes.15
20.2 The possible scores are as set out below.
| |Green<br><br>|Site directly links with an identified active travel routes.| |---|---|---| | |Yellow<br><br>|Site is located within a 0.5km cycling distance of an active travel link.| | |Orange<br><br>|Site is located within a 1km cycling distance of an active travel link.| | |Red<br><br>|Site is located more than 1 km cycling distance from an active travel link.| | |Critical Constraint<br><br>|No Critical Constraint applies|
Assessor Comments:
• Is the site/could the site be served well by all necessary infrastructure, e.g sewerage, water, gas and electricity, telecommunications.
Assessor Comments:
Copyright in submitted documents remains with their authors. Request removal
