Introduction
The borough of Warrington contains significant areas of open
countryside, much of which lies within the broad extent of the
green belt as indicated in the Cheshire 2001 Structure Plan.
The UDP will establish, for the first time, detailed green belt
boundaries within the borough. It also affords protection to
other areas of countryside of notable landscape value and Sites
of Importance for Nature Conservation (SINCs). It reflects European
legislation to protect endangered species and also recognises
the need to protect features such as hedgerows, ponds and watercourses,
which are important for their wildlife and/or recreational value.
Other policies within this chapter seek to protect valuable
areas of open space within the borough’s urban areas,
such as playing fields and other areas used for informal recreation.
Policies within this chapter of the UDP aim to protect and where
possible enhance the natural environment, whilst facilitating
new development where appropriate.
National Planning Policy Guidance
Green belts have been an essential element of planning policy
for over four decades. Government guidance on green belts is
contained in PPG2 which, inter alia, sets out:
- the general intentions of green belt policy and purposes
of including land in green belts;
- advice on defining boundaries and on safeguarding land for
longer-term development needs; and
- a presumption against inappropriate development within green
belts.
Planning policies for the countryside are set out in PPS7
‘Sustainable Development in Rural Areas’, which
emphasises the need to sustain economic activity in rural areas
whilst protecting the countryside. It acknowledges that whilst
stricter controls are necessary in open countryside and in areas
designated for their landscape, wildlife or historic value,
rural areas can, with sensitive planning policies, accommodate
many forms of new development. Whilst the borough has tracts
of attractive, open countryside, it is not typified by a rural
economy (the 1991 Census shows that only 0.76% of the workforce
are employed in agriculture). PPS7 advises that development
plan policies should reflect the need to promote sustainable
development and:
- encourage rural enterprise and diversify into new agricultural
opportunities;
- protect landscape, wildlife and historic features;
- have regard to the quality and versatility of land for use
in forestry and other rural enterprises;
- protect other non-renewable resources;
- strengthen rural communities by encouraging inclusive and
accessible new employment, facilitating an adequate supply
of affordable and market housing and underpinning services
and community facilities;
- achieve good quality development which respects the diversity
and character of the countryside; and
- secure safe development by taking account, where appropriate,
of the stability of the land.
It also requires development plans to safeguard the best and
most versatile agricultural land (see policy REP2 in part 1
of the UDP).
PPG9 'Nature Conservation' sets out the Government’s
policies relating to the natural environment and the role of
the planning system in protecting valued habitats from development,
and in securing enhancement of the natural environment through
development control where appropriate.
PPG17 'Planning for Open Space, Sport and Recreation' describes
the planning system’s role in assessing sporting and recreational
needs and in safeguarding open spaces with recreational or amenity
value. It requires local planning authorities to carry out open
space assessments. The guidance outlines the minimum content
of these assessments and states that they must have a qualitative
component. National standards are to be replaced by local standards
that must include quality, quantity and accessibility components.
Open space must be shown to be surplus in all possible uses
rather than just its existing use. Local planning authorities
are expected to require commercial and industrial developments
to include open spaces, not just landscaping, and to consider
visitors' needs. It encourages local planning authorities to
take account of the community’s need for recreational
space, to have regard to current levels of provision and to
protect and improve open space in areas of deficiency. It also
says that part 2 of the UDP should include specific policies
on public access to open space which has recreational value.
Regional Spatial Strategy
In addition to the policies summarised in the preamble to
the UDP’s Housing chapter, RPG (now RSS) contains a number
of policies which reflect the importance of actively managing
environmental resources. These include:-
- ER1 relating to management of the region’s natural,
built and historic environment;
- ER2 relating to landscape character;
- ER3 relating to built heritage;
- ER5 relating to biodiversity and nature conservation; and
- ER6 relating to woodlands, encouraging at least a 15% increase
in the region’s tree cover by 2020.
As part of the drive to secure an urban renaissance within
the North West’s towns and cities, RPG (now RSS) also
contains policy UR10, under which local authorities and other
agencies should identify the urban areas in need of more green
space, and develop appropriate strategies for the design, management,
maintenance and enhancement of the public realm and urban green
space.
Local Strategy/Part 1 UDP Policies
GRN1 The Green Belt
Green belts are a long-established element of planning policy,
serving to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas;
prevent neighbouring towns from merging into one another; assist
in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; preserve
the setting and special character of historic towns; and to
assist in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of
derelict and other urban land.
This UDP seeks to establish, for the first time, detailed
green belt boundaries within the borough. The only exceptions
are a few small areas on the borough’s boundary, which
were designated as green belt in the Greater Manchester and
Merseyside Green Belt Subject Plans prior to their being transferred
into Warrington following Local Government boundary reviews,
together with parts of the areas covered by ‘part-area’
local plans adopted by the Council in the 1980s.
The essential feature of the green belt is its permanence.
In accordance with PPG2, the Council has drawn up green belt
boundaries capable of enduring well beyond the end of the plan
period (2016). As part of this exercise it has also identified
potential sources of land supply which could accommodate development
that, subject to future reviews of strategic guidance, will
be required beyond 2016 and within the life-span of the green
belt boundaries established in this UDP.
The UDP strategy is concerned with the overall balance between
the needs of development and the interests of conservation.
The plan is also concerned with ensuring that, whenever and
wherever it is necessary to allocate land for development, development
contributes towards the principles of sustainable development
through its general location, its juxtaposition with neighbouring
uses and transport routes, and the mix of uses it contains.
Choices about future development must respect these principles
and be restricted to areas that fall within the agreed environmentally
acceptable ‘limits to growth’ in the borough.
A vital measure in securing adherence to these principles
through planning policy, is the establishment of green belt
boundaries which are capable of remaining unaltered for as far
as can be seen ahead. In that regard, the UDP takes its lead
from RPG (now RSS) policy SD5 which states that, following establishment
of the green belt boundaries in Warrington for the first time
in this UDP, there will be no need to undertake a further study
of strategic or detailed boundaries before 2021. It is acknowledged
that some years would be required for such a review to run its
course and for a ‘lead-time’ for preparation of
land and granting of planning permissions for any required development
to take place on land released from the green belt (if that
were to be the outcome of the review). It is thus reasonable
to conclude that the green belt boundaries now defined should
be capable of accommodating development requirements until about
2026, i.e. 10 years beyond the end of the plan period.
The green belt boundaries, as described in policy GRN1 and
shown on the proposals map, thus define the minimum extent of
the green belt required to ensure that the fundamental purposes
of the North Cheshire Green Belt are secured within the borough,
for as far as can be seen ahead at the time of preparation of
the UDP.
In delineating the green belt boundaries, the Council is satisfied
that the amount and distribution of land potentially available
for development, both within the plan period to 2016 and throughout
the intended life of the green belt thereafter, is capable of
accommodating any reasonably foreseeable future development
requirements.
Whilst it is accepted that there is uncertainty as to the
strategic planning framework that will guide Warrington’s
development after 2016, the Council accords great weight to
the emphasis that RPG (now RSS) places on the overriding priority
for development and investment in the region to be directed
to the regeneration of the cores of the conurbations, and on
the challenge it sets for local authorities to co-operate to
ensure that the sequential approach to allocating and releasing
land for development (including bringing unused buildings back
into use) is reflected in co-ordinated decision-making across
authorities’ boundaries. The need to positively resist
greenfield releases throughout the region to support that strategy
is emphasised strongly.
The quest for an urban renaissance, which is at the heart
of RPG (now RSS), needs to be supported by a long-term strategic
approach, with the implication that the protection of greenfield
sites from development, except where demonstrably necessary
to sustain RPG’s (now RSS) Core Development Principles
and Spatial Development Strategy, should continue for the foreseeable
future, i.e. beyond 2016. RPG (now RSS) does not prescribe or
presume that housing development rates applying to 2016 for
individual authorities’ areas should continue beyond 2016.
It is considered proper to assert that any future review and
possible adjustment of those rates of development (including
reviews taking place in the period up to 2016) should be driven
by the need to keep the region’s urban renaissance strategy
on course.
The protection of the green belt, in particular, is referred
to in RPG (now RSS) policy SD4 as an essential tool in maintaining
urban form, enhancing urban living and ensuring a visually attractive
and accessible setting around all settlements; all being essential
components of the strategy underpinning the desired urban renaissance.
The Council placed a high degree of reliance upon RPG during
the preparation of the revised deposit UDP and, in keeping with
its support for the key components of the regional planning
strategy, considered it necessary and appropriate to delineate
green belt boundaries which will place reasonable limitations
on opportunities for outward expansion of Warrington on to greenfield
sites for the foreseeable future. To that end, the Council has
felt justified in including in the green belt all of those sites
to which the First Deposit Draft UDP policy GRN2 'Safeguarded
Land' had been designed to apply. Each of those sites fulfils
at least one of the purposes of including land in the green
belt, as established in PPG2, taking account, in particular,
of the raised significance of the green belt’s function
of supporting urban regeneration as emphasised in RPG (now RSS).
Evidence of a potentially more than adequate supply of housing
and employment land to 2016 has been set out in the justification
for policies HOU1 and EMP1 and in the Council’s evidence
to the Inquiry.
It is also important to show that there will be continuing
sources of supply beyond 2016 and within the intended life-span
of the green belt boundaries as now defined. In that regard,
the up-to-date assessments of housing and employment land supply,
together with forecasts of the reasonably-expected rate of take-up
of land and of prospects for additional land coming forward
through a pro-active urban regeneration strategy, point to the
potential availability of a continuing post-2016 supply of land
from the following sources:
English Partnerships’ land-holdings in South Warrington,
covered by approvals under section 7(i) of the New Towns Act,
now to be subject to a phasing policy under policy HOU1 (with
a capacity for 1,237 houses, subject to review of densities
as part of any proposals for their release if and when required).
Further ‘windfalls’ for housing, employment or
mixed uses, including those sourced from Potential Urban Regeneration
Areas identified in policy EMP8, with the expectation that the
‘lead-time’ required for infrastructure provision
will leave a significant but currently unquantifiable proportion
of land within those areas available for development after 2016.
Approximately 60 hectares of the Omega Regional Investment
Site, given that the masterplan envisaged a development period
of approximately 25 years for the full site. In this regard,
whilst it is acknowledged that the Regional Investment Site
will provide employment opportunities for residents from a wider
area than Warrington, a substantial proportion of employees
on the site will be residents of the borough.
Land within committed sites for housing which may ‘slip’
to beyond 2016, without creating a shortfall in supply in relation
to requirements in the period up to 2016.
Increased capacity for housing, arising from reviews of densities
on identified housing sites in support of guidance contained
in PPG3.
A proportion of the sites contributing towards the employment
land supply referred to in policy EMP1, which it is expected
will remain available for the post-2016 period, on the basis
that the policy allows for choices to be made from within that
supply to meet requirements to 2016. It is presently forecast
that between 30-50 hectares will be available from this source
after 2016.
Greenfield sites which may be declared surplus to requirements
within the framework of guidance in PPG17 'Planning for Open
Space, Sport and Recreation', and which would be released for
development only in accordance with the sequential approach
to ‘Plan, Monitor and Manage’ the release of land
for housing.
Land from within some of those identified and potential sources
of supply is likely to be developed before 2016 where this is
unavoidable or imprudent in terms of the contribution that swift
release of previously-developed land can make to urban regeneration
in Warrington. The potential effects of this, in exacerbating
what is already a potential ‘over-provision’ of
land to 2016 in relation to RPG (now RSS) requirements, may
be seen to have diverted development and investment away from
the region’s priority regeneration areas. Should monitoring
at regional and sub-regional levels show that to be the case,
it would properly raise the issue as to whether ‘corrective’
action should be taken in reviews of RPG (now RSS), by further
reducing the rate of development in Warrington to both reinforce
the region’s urban renaissance strategy and help ensure
the long-term protection of the green belt within the borough.
GRN2 Environmental Protection
This policy sets out the Council’s overall strategy
to protect important elements of the borough’s natural
and built environment. It seeks to protect the open countryside
by directing new development towards existing built-up areas.
This approach is consistent with the aims of promoting urban
regeneration and sustainability by reducing the need to travel
overall and increasing opportunities to travel using public
transport.
Within the built-up area, the Council will safeguard valuable
open spaces and important features of Warrington’s built
heritage. Outside the built-up areas, its aim is to maintain
the attractiveness of the countryside by safeguarding and, where
possible, enhancing woodland cover, biodiversity and by protecting
wildlife and their habitats.
All of these considerations are the subject of more detailed
and specific policies in part 2 of the UDP.
GRN3 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS IN THE COUNTRYSIDE
Development proposals in the countryside which are not precluded
by policies for the green belt will be approved provided that:
-
the detailed siting of the development is compatible
with the character of the surrounding area and is not intrusive
in the landscape;
-
the interests of nature conservation are not compromised
-
the design of the development relates satisfactorily
to its rural setting, in immediate impact, or from distant
views, and respects local landscape character;
-
if significant numbers are likely to be attracted to
it, the development provides for access by public transport,
cycling and walking to minimise new trips by car and not
materially worsen traffic conditions or affect road safety;
-
car, motorcycle, and cycle parking is provided in accordance
with the Council’s parking policy and standards;
-
unintrusive provision can be made for any associated
servicing and parking facilities or plant, equipment and
storage;
-
the development contributes to rural enterprise and farm
diversification and has no detrimental impact on agricultural
interests or the rural economy;
-
the proposal incorporates appropriate landscaping and
wildlife habitat creation, including tree and woodland planting
where appropriate; and
-
there is no disruption to public footpaths.
Policy Derivation:
PPG1, PPG2, PPS7, PPG12
Reason and Explanation:
This policy is aimed at the rural areas of the borough which
are all designated as green belt and policy GRN1 provides
that appropriate development may be allowed in these areas.
This policy builds upon that general guidance by setting out
the criteria against which acceptable forms of development
will be assessed in order to maintain the character and appearance
of the countryside. Tree planting should utilise locally native
species where appropriate.
In addressing landscape character for the purposes of paragraph
3 above, the Council will rely upon its landscape character
assessment of the Borough, which will take account of historic
character, and will have the status of Supplementary Planning
Guidance. At the time of adoption of this Plan that assessment
had not been completed and, until it is, the weight to be
placed upon it will be limited accordingly.
Area of Coverage:
Within Warrington, the countryside is taken to mean the
rural areas lying outside the built-up areas of the town,
inset villages and Green Belt villages as defined on the Proposals
Map.
Other Related Policies:
GRN1, GRN2, GRN24, LUT1, LUT21, REP1, REP2,
GRN4 INSET VILLAGES
The following villages are inset into the green belt:
The following development will be allowed within inset villages:
-
housing development and redevelopment of an appropriate
scale, character and design, provided the loss of a site
previously providing employment is not detrimental to the
rural economy or the development of sustainable communities;
-
conversions of existing buildings to housing, provided
their loss is not detrimental to the rural economy through
the loss of viable premises for business or commerce;
-
new employment or mixed-use development of an appropriate
scale and type;
-
development providing local services and facilities of
an appropriate scale and type.
Policy Derivation:
PPG2
Reason and Explanation:
1. Villages are inset into the green belt where development
is to be allowed within the existing built-up area during
the plan period. The following criteria have been used to
select inset villages:-
- They are suitable for accommodating small groups of houses,
or
- There are existing planning permissions for new development:
and
- They already possess local services, including shops and
a school.
2. 2. All proposals for housing development will also need
to address the requirements of policies HOU2 and HOU3.
3. In the case of Glazebury, further explanation is necessary
as the amendment to the village inset boundary involves a
change to an adopted green belt. The administrative boundary
of the borough was revised with effect from 1st April 1994
and land north of Glazebury which formerly lay in Wigan Metropolitan
Borough was transferred to Warrington Borough. The previously
identified village boundary coincided with the old borough
boundary and thereby excluded land and buildings to the north,
which also form part of the settlement. This area, formerly
within Wigan is part of the adopted Greater Manchester Green
Belt.
4. However, in terms of land use, built form, general appearance
and character, the northern most section is indistinguishable
from the rest, and it would be wholly illogical for two parts
of the same settlement to be subject to entirely different
policy regimes within the UDP. In the circumstances, the inclusion
of the northern most section of the settlement within the
village inset is the correct approach and the reasons for
this change, as endorsed by the Warrington Borough Draft Local
Plan Inspector, represent exceptional circumstances which
justify the alteration to the adopted green belt.
5. The Council has worked with local communities to prepare
Village Design Statements, to promote development that is
in keeping with individual villages. These Design Statements
have been successfully adopted as Supplementary Planning Guidance.
6. Grappenhall Heys was originally planned as an integral
element of the New Town Outline Plan’s proposals for
expansion onto previously undeveloped land in south Warrington,
contiguous with the established, mainly residential suburbs.
In 1989, the (then) Secretary of State granted approval under
section 7(1) of the New Towns Act for the development of Grappenhall
Heys, in physical isolation from the existing built-up area,
and from other areas for which approvals were granted concurrently.
7. A substantial proportion of Grappenhall Heys has either
now been developed or is committed to be developed in accordance
with subsequent detailed approvals given under section 7(2)
of the same act. The balance of the area with extant section
7(1) approval remains committed to development. The remaining
open land between the approved 7(1) area and the existing
built-up area of Warrington is proposed as green belt.
8. The designation of Grappenhall Heys as an inset village
is an appropriate response to the circumstance that has arisen,
and will provide a suitable policy framework for the control
of development. The defined settlement boundary of Grappenhall
Heys is drawn tightly around those areas already developed
or committed through section 7(2) approvals and therefore
excludes areas with 7(1) approval only. These areas are unlikely
to be developed during the plan period as explained and provided
for in policy HOU1, in accordance with the sequential test
to be applied to greenfield development under PPG3 and the
plan, monitor and manage approach to the control of housing
development.
Area of Coverage:
Inset villages, as defined on the Proposals Map.
Other Related Policies:
HOU2, HOU3, HOU4, HOU6, HOU7, HOU8, HOU9, HOU10, EMP6
GRN5 GREEN BELT VILLAGES
The boundaries of the following green belt villages are shown
on the Proposals Map:
Within these boundaries:
-
the Council will permit limited infill development of
an appropriate scale, design and character, provided that
the site constitutes a small break within development, and
unless the break contributes to the character of the village
or has more affinity with the openness of the green belt
than the built form of the village;
-
proposals for the change of use or conversion of buildings
will be subject to policy GRN6;
-
all other proposals will be subject to policy GRN1.
Policy Derivation:
PPG2
Reason and Explanation:
This policy identifies villages ‘washed over’
by the green belt, which do not satisfy the criteria for inset
villages, but are nonetheless established settlements supporting
more limited local services and facilities. The development
and redevelopment opportunities specified in this policy are
of a scale which will not adversely affect the character of
the villages nor undermine the purposes of the green belt.
All proposals for housing development will also need to address
the requirements of Policies HOU2 and HOU3.
Area of Coverage:
Green belt villages, as defined on the Proposals Map.
Other Related Policies:
HOU2, HOU3, HOU4, HOU6, HOU7, HOU8, HOU9, HOU10, EMP6, GRN6
GRN6 THE RE-USE OF BUILDINGS IN THE GREEN
BELT
The re-use of buildings in the green belt will be permitted
provided that:
-
the proposed use does not have a materially greater impact
than the present use on the openness of the green belt,
the character of the countryside, or visual amenity;
-
no detriment is caused to the openness of the green belt
or the character of the countryside through any associated
uses of land surrounding the building;
-
the buildings are of permanent and substantial construction,
and are capable of conversion without major or complete
reconstruction;
-
the form, bulk, and general design of the buildings are
in keeping with their surroundings and any associated extensions
or alterations respect their character and style, or achieve
an improvement to the external appearance of the buildings;
-
the proposed use does not cause detriment to the amenity
of neighbours;
-
the development will not materially worsen traffic conditions
or adversely affect road safety;
-
the proposal takes account of the interests of nature
conservation, particularly where buildings may be used by
bats, barn owls, nesting birds or other protected species;
and
-
the proposal does not adversely affect the rural economy
through the loss of viable premises suitable for local commerce
or industry.
Supplementary Planning Guidance:
Design guidelines for conversion or re-use of buildings
in rural areas
Policy Derivation:
PPG2, PPS7
Reason and Explanation:
1. With suitable safeguards, the re-use of buildings should
not prejudice the openness of the green belt, since the buildings
are already there. The government is keen to encourage re-use
as this may prevent vacant buildings becoming derelict, will
ensure the careful stewardship of resources, may contribute
to the rural economy, and positively contribute to green belt
land use objectives.
2. Nevertheless, it is appropriate to exercise careful control
to prevent harm to the openness of the green belt and the
character of the countryside.
3. In applying clause 2, ‘associated uses of land
surrounding the building’ include external storage,
extensive hardstanding, car parking and garaging, boundary
walling and fencing.
4. The Council will require the submission of a full structural
survey where it has reasonable cause to consider that the
building cannot be re-used without major reconstruction.
5. If the proposal relates to a building which, in the opinion
of the Council, has a significant adverse effect on the landscape
in terms of visual amenity, conditions may be imposed on the
permission to secure an improvement to its external appearance
in connection with any proposed structural changes.
6. Where there is a likelihood that the building may be
used by bats, barn owls or other protected species, an investigation
will be carried out and if their presence is confirmed, controls
will be imposed to ensure damage to habitats is minimised.
7. The Council will examine applications for changes to
residential use with particular care. New housing in the open
countryside is subject to strict control and this policy applies
similar principles to proposals for the conversion of existing
rural buildings to dwellings. In particular the creation of
a residential curtilage around a newly converted building
can sometimes have a harmful effect on the character of the
countryside.
8. Additional controls will apply if the building concerned
is of Architectural or Historic Interest (See Built Heritage
policies).
Area of Coverage:
The green belt as defined on the Proposals Map, including
the green belt villages listed in policy GRN5.
Other Related Policies:
GRN1, GRN3, GRN19
GRN7 AGRICULTURAL / FORESTRY DWELLINGS
In the green belt new dwellings for workers engaged in agriculture
or forestry will only be permitted where it is essential to
the proper functioning of the enterprise to have one or more
workers living nearby. Applicants will be required to demonstrate
to the Council that such a requirement exists.
Policy Derivation:
PPG2, PPS7
Reason and Explanation:
1. Current national guidance advises that one of the few
circumstances in which isolated residential development in
the countryside may be justified is when accommodation is
required to enable farm or forestry workers to live at or
in the immediate vicinity of their place of work. Where a
new dwelling is justified, to minimise its impact on the landscape
sites within the farm complex should be explored first followed
by sites that are close to the complex or to an existing dwelling.
Only in exceptional circumstances should other sites be considered.
2. In assessing applications for new dwellings, the Council
will apply a ‘functional test’ to establish whether
such a requirement exists, e.g. where workers are needed to
be on hand day and night:
- in case animals or agricultural processes require essential
care at short notice
- to deal quickly with emergencies that could otherwise
cause serious loss of crops or products.
3. The protection of livestock from theft or injury by intruders
may contribute to need on animal welfare grounds, although
it will not by itself justify a new dwelling. Requirements
arising from food processing, as opposed to agriculture, cannot
be used to justify an agricultural dwelling, nor can agricultural
needs justify the provision of new retirement homes for farmers.
4. In some cases the Council may also require financial
evidence in support of applications for new dwellings where:
the functional test is inconclusive; or
the application relates to the intention to set up a completely
new business or a major change in the nature or scale of an
existing business.
5. In these circumstances the Council will need to be satisfied
that the proposed development is likely to be implemented
and will therefore require information regarding investment
projections and sources of finance.
Area of Coverage:
The green belt as defined on the Proposals Map.
Other Related Policies:
GRN1, GRN3, GRN5
GRN8 MAJOR DEVELOPED SITES IN THE GREEN
BELT
1. The following are identified as major developed sites
in the green belt:
Within the boundaries of these sites identified on the Proposals
Map, limited infilling, or redevelopment which meets the following
criteria, will not be inappropriate development.
2. Limited infilling should:
-
be for the continuing use of the site within the area
designated for this purpose and shown cross-hatched on the
Proposals Map,
-
have no greater impact on the purposes of including land
in the green belt than the existing development,
-
not exceed the height of existing buildings, and
-
not lead to a major increase in the developed proportion
of the site.
3. Complete or partial redevelopment should:
-
result in an improvement to the environment,
-
have no greater impact than the existing development on
the openness of the green belt and the purposes of including
land within it, and where possible, have less,
-
contribute to the achievement of the objectives for the
use of land in green belts, and
-
not exceed the height of the existing buildings, and not
occupy a larger area of the site than the existing buildings
(unless to do so would achieve a reduction in height which
would benefit visual amenity).
Proposals for partial redevelopment will not be approved
in the absence of a comprehensive long-term plan for the site
as a whole.
The character and dispersal of new buildings in a redevelopment
scheme must have regard to the openness of the green belt and
the purposes of including land in it, the objectives for the
use of land in green belts, the main features of the landscape,
and the need to integrate the new development with its surroundings.
Proposals must also take full account of visual amenity,
traffic and travel implications, and environmental considerations
including nature conservation.
Policy Derivation:
PPG2
Reason and Explanation:
1. This policy sets out the criteria for infilling, partial
or complete redevelopment of major existing developed sites
in the green belt in accordance with PPG2 Annex C.
2. For the purposes of 3(4) above, the relevant area is
the aggregate ground floor area of the existing buildings
(‘the footprint’), excluding temporary buildings,
open spaces with direct external access between wings of a
building, and areas of hardstanding.
3. The sites identified as falling within this policy are
consistent with the guidance given in paragraph C1 of Annex
C to PPG2.
Area of Coverage:
The relevant sites are defined on the Proposals Map.
Other Related Policies:
GRN1, GRN2, GRN3, GRN6, GRN23, GRN24, GRN25, DCS1, DCS2,
DCS4, DCS9, LUT1, HOU1, EMP1
GRN9 OUTDOOR ACTIVITIES IN THE COUNTRYSIDE
Outdoor activities and sports, which because of their nature
can adversely affect the amenities of residents or other users
of the countryside, will be permitted only where all of the
following circumstances apply: -
-
there is no unacceptable increase in noise, vibration,
fumes or visual disturbance likely to harm the amenity of
nearby residential property or the value of other environmentally
sensitive areas or features;
-
there is no unacceptable increase in traffic flows or
congestion such as to be harmful to public safety or the
environment, particularly if there would be heavy traffic
flows on a minor road through a village or past a significant
number of houses;
-
it would not cause permanent or irreparable damage to
the environment or endanger wildlife, people, or property;
-
there is no conflict with agricultural interests;
-
there is no harm to the character of the countryside
or the local landscape, or there is a positive benefit to
a degraded landscape; and
-
suitable controls over the type of equipment used and
the level and hours of operation can be secured through
conditions or planning obligations.
Policy Derivation:
PPG17
Reason and Explanation:
Many sports, especially those using motorised vehicles,
can create a significant nuisance in their own right as well
as attracting large numbers of spectators who may themselves
create an intrusion in the countryside. However such sports
are very popular and a balance needs to be struck between
environmental and sporting interests. This policy sets down
criteria for the selection and consideration of sites for
these purposes.
Area of Coverage:
Borough-wide
Other Related Policies:
DCS1, GRN1, GRN2, REP1, REP2
GRN10 PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF URBAN
GREENSPACE
The Council will not permit development likely to result
in an unacceptable loss of green space within the built-up areas
of the borough. Proposals will be assessed in the light of:
-
the effect of such loss on the level, availability and
accessibility of recreational facilities, children’s
play provision and public open space in the neighbourhood,
taking into account the needs of future generations;
-
the role that the site plays as part of the existing
or proposed Greenway Network of recreational footpaths and
cycleways identified on the Proposals Map, or as a link
to other green spaces or the countryside;
-
its landscape and/or nature conservation value;
-
its value as a buffer zone between other uses, including
noise attenuation zones;
-
its value as a visual amenity or townscape feature in
contributing to the character or appearance of the surrounding
area;
-
its importance to the avoidance of town cramming or as
a visual break in an otherwise intensively developed area;
-
any associated proposals for the enhancement of existing
facilities nearby or provision of equivalent replacement
facilities; and
-
Its importance as a community resource for formal or
informal events.
In areas shown to be deficient in open space, sports or recreational
provision in either quality or quantity, development proposals
will be expected to contribute to their enhancement or provision
Policy Derivation:
PPG9, PPG12, PPG17
ODPM - Assessing needs and opportunities: A companion guide
to PPG17
Reason and Explanation:
1. This policy applies to all those areas of green space
within the built areas of the borough (i.e. not shown as green
belt on the Proposals Map) which are either visually or functionally
open to the public and therefore have an amenity, aesthetic
or practical value to the community. This includes land in
both public and private ownership. Sites in green belt villages,
or covered by green belt policy elsewhere, are not shown on
the Proposals Map as being protected green space. Nevertheless,
should development proposals arise which are not precluded
by policy GRN1 'The Green Belt', it will be necessary for
an assessment to be made against the above criteria.
2. Such sites normally make an important contribution to
the environmental standards, level of amenity, and quality
of life available to residents within the built areas of the
borough, especially in those parts of the town which do not
have ease of access to open countryside. PPG17 has raised
the status of urban open space as an important land use in
its own right. Some areas of the borough are however less
well provided than others by the different types of open spaces
and recreational facilities when assessed against the relevant
standards. In deficient areas the protection and enhancement
of provision will be a prime consideration when the Council
is determining planning applications. An assessment of provision
was made in the ‘Open Space Background Paper’
(see below).
3. The policy sets out clear criteria against which proposals
for the development of urban green space will be tested and
the application of this policy is not limited to land currently
in specific use for recreational purposes. Open land which
comprises green space in the built area of the town and which
does not have planning permission or is not allocated for
development, will be subject to assessment against the criteria
in this policy if development proposals arise. Proposals involving
the redevelopment of brownfield sites will also be assessed
taking into account any identified need for additional open
space or recreation facility in the locality.
4. In considering whether a development proposal will have
a detrimental effect on the level and availability of open
space or on the character of an area, or whether there is
a requirement to enhance or provide open space, the Council
will have regard to an assessment of open space and recreation
provision against the Council’s standards, and to a
qualitative appraisal of the site and its setting. The quantitative
assessment has been revised and updated following re-survey,
and in the light of revised PPG17, and was published as a
Supplementary Planning Document, ‘Open Space and Recreation
Provision’ in 2005. In association with Sport England,
the Council has also prepared a Playing Pitch Strategy and
its recommendations are reflected in the above SPD. Appendix
2 to the adopted UDP includes a schedule of spaces protected
by this Policy, including those sites in Green Belt Villages
to which the policy criteria may be applied in accordance
with paragraph 1 above. The schedule is correct as at January
2006 and will be updated annually.
5. The object of the policy is to prevent losses of valuable
open space and open land within the built areas of the borough,
but it is not possible to protect each and every such area
regardless of circumstances. Although the value of open land
within the built areas can be compared with the value of open
countryside in terms of the amenity and quality of life of
the borough’s residents, an urban equivalent of ‘green
belt’ policy is not allowed for within the planning
framework of the development plan.
6. In most cases, in order to protect urban land in private
ownership from development in favour of a preference for public
open space, the Council must be able to show that it is committed
to purchasing the site in question for public use, and has
to purchase the land at its development value regardless of
the fact that it will be used as open space. The law does
not allow a private interest in land to be penalised for the
public good;
7. In many instances, therefore, it is likely that the Council
will seek to negotiate a compromise between some development
and the retention of open land, and to ensure that the open
land retained is made fully available for public use.
8. Playing fields, whether public or private, are afforded
special status by PPG17 which makes it clear that they should
normally be protected from development except in special circumstances.
Their protection is the subject of policy GRN11.
9. Proposals for small scale structures which support the
existing recreational use of green space, or provide facilities
for new recreational uses will need to take these criteria
into account to ensure the proposed development is sensitive
to the local context.
Area of Coverage:
This policy applies throughout all built areas, town and
village, of the borough.
Other Related Policies:
DCS1, DCS2, DCS4, LUT15, HOU1, HOU2, HOU3, GRN1, GRN2, GRN11,
REP1, SOC1
GRN11 PLAYING FIELDS
Development which results in the loss of playing fields will
not be permitted except where:
-
alternative provision of equivalent community benefit
in terms of location, quantity and quality is made available;
-
the proposed development is ancillary to the use of the
site as a playing field (e.g. new changing rooms) and does
not adversely affect the quantity or quality of pitches
and their use;
-
the proposed development only affects land which is incapable
of forming a playing pitch (or part of one);
-
the playing fields that would be lost as a result of
the proposed development would be replaced by a playing
field or fields of equivalent or better quantity and quality
and in a suitable location or;
-
the proposed development is for an outdoor or indoor
sports facility of sufficient benefit to the development
of sport to outweigh the loss of the playing field; and
-
the needs assessment demonstrates that the site is surplus
to requirements in relation to all the functions that open
space can perform.
Policy Derivation:
PPG17
ODPM - Assessing needs and opportunities: A companion guide
to PPG17
Statutory Instrument 1996 No.1817
Reason and Explanation:
1. Many playing fields, including those belonging to schools,
colleges and sports clubs, are not public open space but are
invariably perceived as part of the community. School fields
in particular are often used out of school hours by the public,
and may contribute to the character and amenity of residential
areas. In some parts of the borough, school fields are the
only or principal areas of green space available, and are
therefore especially important assets (for details see the
Open Space Background Paper).
2. An aim of this policy is to ensure that the redevelopment
of redundant school sites or the disposal of ‘surplus’
playing fields does not take place at the expense of the amenity
and character of residential areas, and the needs of local
residents for access to open space, especially in those areas
particularly dependent on school fields for green space. It
is also important to ensure that schools retain sufficient
playing fields for their own use, taking into account the
needs of future generations.
3. The policy also applies to private playing fields which
may be subject to redevelopment proposals even though they
are in active use, as their owners seek to create a capital
asset by seeking planning permission for development. Such
clubs are a valuable recreation resource and merit protection.
The criteria adopted in this policy reflect the approach in
revised PPG17. The ‘Open Space and Recreation’
Supplementary Planning Document and the Warrington Playing
Pitch Strategy referred to under policy GRN10 will make this
assessment in the borough. Pending completion of the SPD,
an applicant for planning permission should seek to demonstrate
through an independent assessment that any facilities that
will be lost are surplus to requirements.
4. Appendix 2 to the adopted UDP includes a schedule of spaces
protected by this Policy, including those sites in Green Belt
Villages to which the policy criteria may be applied in accordance
with paragraph 1 above. The schedule is correct as at January
2006 and will be updated annually.
Area of Coverage:
Borough-wide
Other Related Policies:
GRN10
GRN12 OPPORTUNITIES TO IMPROVE OPEN SPACE
PROVISION
The following sites are identified as opportunities to improve
and extend open space provision and/or the Greenway Network:
Policy Derivation:
PPG17
Reason and Explanation:
1. The Open Space and Recreation Supplementary Planning
Document provides a very comprehensive appraisal of the current
levels of open space provision across the borough. Provision
is compared with recognised standards to enable an assessment
of neighbourhoods deficient in public open space to be made.
2. The Open Land Survey which informed the above exercise
also identified several unused or derelict sites which presented
an opportunity to enhance open space in the town of Warrington,
either in quality or quantity.
3. This policy identifies several such sites and registers
the Council’s interest in making them available for
public use, following environmental improvement as necessary,
and subject to the successful conclusion of any necessary
negotiations with landowners.
4. All of the sites listed are currently in private ownership,
and are largely or wholly unused at present. They are not
subject to existing planning permissions for development,
and some may not be suitable for development. The majority
are in areas where a shortfall in open space currently exists.
5. The acquisition of any or all of these sites could prove
costly and may, realistically, be beyond the Council’s
reach. The negotiation of lease or access agreements may however
be achievable if the co-operation of landowners can be obtained.
This in turn may well depend on the aspirations of the owners
of individual sites to obtain planning permission for a more
profitable use of the site or adjoining land. Such applications
for planning permission will be dealt with in the context
of all the relevant UDP policies. This particular policy may
only be relevant if the Council can demonstrate at the time
an application is made that the resources to acquire the site
in question are available to put the policy into effect.
6. This policy in itself should not therefore be taken as
any guarantee that any or all of the sites listed will not
be developed for another purpose. In that event, however,
the Council will seek to secure environmental gains by negotiation
with the applicants.
7. The land at Well Lane, Penketh, previously listed under
the First Deposit Draft policy is now included in the green
belt as an associated revision to the UDP.
Area of Coverage:
The specific sites referred to as shown on the Proposals
Map. They are:
1. Former sewage treatment works, Kingsway: This site is
a key element of the wedge of open land which brings the
Mersey Valley into the heart of the urban area of Warrington.
It is currently unused and in a semi-derelict condition.
The Mersey Way footpath skirts the land. It is owned by
United Utilities plc. Proposals for residential development
and recreational facilities linked to improvements to Cardinal
Newman High School were submitted in 2003.
2. Land adjoining Black Bear Park, Loushers Lane: This
land is owned by Greenalls and adjoins Black Bear Park,
from which it is accessible. The site can also play an important
role in the Greenway Network and if development proposals
come forward which affect this site, the Council will seek
to safeguard these interests by negotiation with the applicant.
3. Land south of Penketh Road: This unused area of open
land adjacent to Eagle Sports Club, was identified in the
original survey as potential public open space (in conjunction
with area 5 below), and was again located in a deficient
area. The site is now in active use as a playing pitch.
4. Whittle Brook, south of Penketh Road: The Whittle Brook
linear park extends currently from west of Lingley Green
Avenue to the A57 at Whittle Avenue. Its continuation south
of Penketh Road to join the St Helens Canal is an established
aim of open space/footpath development in this area, and
a planning appeal decision has supported this aim.
5. Land at Station Road, Penketh: This site is located
well within the residential area of Penketh, and has potential
for public open space if brought into public ownership.
There are understood to be severe development constraints.
6. Land at Longshaw Street, Dallam: This vacant land is
owned by English Partnerships and is a link between Dallam
and the continuation of Sankey Valley Park north of Cromwell
Avenue.
7. Land at Marsden Avenue, Westy: This is an old waste
tip, badly contaminated, previously believed not to be suitable
for development. It may be a good site for Mersey Forest
Planting. There has however recently been some interest
in developing the site for housing.
Other Related Policies:
DCS1, DCS2
GRN13 RIVERSIDE AND CANALSIDE DEVELOPMENT
Development adjoining or near to rivers or canals will not
be permitted if it would have an adverse effect on nature conservation,
fisheries, landscape, public access, or water-based or waterside
recreation.
Development which visually and physically adjoins waterways
will be required to exploit and enhance their recreational,
wildlife and amenity value, and wherever possible should provide
for safe public access to and along the waterside. Access for
operational and maintenance purposes should also be safeguarded
and buffer strips provided where appropriate.
Policy Derivation:
Environment Agency Model Land Use Policies
2000/60/EC Water Framework Directive
Reason and Explanation:
1. The Council recognises that rivers and canals are of
great importance for water resources, water quality, nature
conservation, fisheries, recreation and the character of the
landscape. In many instances land adjoining or near to rivers
is an important source of open space and frequently also forms
links or ‘green chains’ between areas of open
space, often across borough boundaries. These links can be
crucial for the survival or enhancement of wildlife.
2. The Council will generally support initiatives and proposals
which will result in the conservation or enhancement of the
natural elements of the riverine environment, result in landscape
improvements, or which promote public access and water-based
or waterside recreation.
3. In terms of physical built development particular attention
will be paid to the siting and orientation of buildings and
public space in new developments, with the emphasis on increasing
public access to waterside locations and enhancing their appearance.
4. The Council will have regard to the objectives of the
Mersey Basin Campaign in considering development proposals
relating to land adjoining the River Mersey and its tributaries.
5. It is acknowledged that in the interest of public safety
it will not always be appropriate to allow access to the banks
of the Manchester Ship Canal.
6. The maintenance of public access to the waterside safeguards
the future possible use of waterways as a sustainable means
of transport.
7. The Environment Agency has published guidance relating
to the issue of buffer strips
Area of Coverage:
Borough-wide
Other Related Policies:
DCS4, DCS6, LUT15, GRN12,
GRN14 WATERCOURSES
The culverting of watercourses will not be permitted where
it would cause detriment to visual amenity, nature conservation,
or public safety.
Policy Derivation:
Environment Agency guidance.
Reason and Explanation:
The culverting of watercourses will not normally be permitted
since it results in a break in the continuity of the river
corridor and may also have serious implications for safety,
maintenance and flooding.
Area of Coverage:
Borough-wide
Other Related Policies:
DCS1, GRN12, GRN13
GRN15 SITES OF INTERNATIONAL IMPORTANCE
FOR NATURE CONSERVATION
The following sites have been designated as candidate European
Sites of international importance (Special Areas of Conservation):
-
-
-
Proposals for development which may affect these sites will
be subject to the most rigorous examination. Development or
land use change not directly connected with or necessary to
the management of the site and which is likely to have significant
effects on the site (either individually or in combination with
other plans or projects) and which would affect the integrity
of the site, will not be permitted unless the Council is satisfied
that:
-
there is no alternative solution; and
-
there are imperative reasons of over-riding public interest
for the development or land use change.
Where the site concerned hosts a priority natural habitat
type, and / or a priority species, development or land use change
will not be permitted unless it is necessary for imperative
reasons of human health or public safety, or for benefits of
primary importance for the environment.
Where development is permitted the Council will consider
the use of conditions or planning obligations to ensure the
protection and enhancement of the site’s nature conservation
interest.
GRN16 SITES OF NATIONAL IMPORTANCE FOR
NATURE CONSERVATION
The following sites have been designated as Sites of Special
Scientific Interest:
-
-
-
-
Proposals for development in or likely to affect these sites
will be subject to special scrutiny. Where such development
may have an adverse effect, directly or indirectly, on the SSSI
it will not be permitted unless the reasons for the development
clearly outweigh the nature conservation value of the site itself
and the national policy to safeguard the national network of
such sites.
Where development is permitted, the Council will consider
the use of conditions or planning obligations to ensure the
protection and enhancement of the site’s nature conservation
interest.
GRN17 SITES OF LOCAL IMPORTANCE FOR NATURE
CONSERVATION
The following sites have been designated as of local significance
for nature conservation:
Local Nature Reserves
Sites of Importance for Nature Conservation
Development likely to have an adverse effect on these sites
will not be permitted unless it can be clearly demonstrated
that there are reasons for the development which outweigh the
need to safeguard the substantive nature conservation value
of the site or feature.
Where development is permitted which would damage the nature
conservation value of the site or feature, such damage will
be kept to a minimum. Where appropriate, the Council will consider
the use of conditions or planning obligations to provide appropriate
compensatory measures.
Policy Derivation:
PPG9
English Nature model policies
Reason and Explanation:
1. This group of policies are designed to protect sites
of recognised nature conservation value (ecological, geological,
geomorphological). The conservation of such sites is vital
to the preservation of wildlife heritage. The policies reflect
the advice in national planning guidance that the degree of
protection afforded will vary according to the status of a
site. Hence local sites do not carry the same level of protection
as internationally important sites. The international sites
at Risley Moss and Holcroft Moss are two of three sites which
make up the Manchester Mosses Special Area of Conservation.
2. The sites listed are correct as at 1 January 2006. Any
additional sites that may be identified after this date will
also be protected by these policies as soon as they are designated.
3. Many of the sites identified in previous plans were primarily
in the rural areas of the borough. The Council has given high
priority to the identification of further sites whose local
value should be protected and nurtured, especially in the
urban areas where they can contribute to the overall protection
and provision of open space, provide access to nature, and
enhance local environmental quality.
4. Further information can be found in the Council’s
Nature Conservation Strategy.
Area of Coverage:
All the currently scheduled sites as shown on the Proposals
Map.
Other Related Policies:
GRN2, GRN21, DCS2
GRN18 KEY BIODIVERSITY HABITATS AND PRIORITY
SPECIES
Development which may adversely affect the integrity or continuity
of UK Key habitats or other habitats of local importance as
listed below, or adversely effect UK Priority Species or other
species of local importance, or which are the subject of Local
Biodiversity Action Plans as listed in appendix 9 will only
be permitted if it can be shown that the reasons for the development
clearly outweigh the need to retain the habitats or species
affected, and that mitigating measures can be provided which
would reinstate the habitats or provide equally viable alternative
refuge sites for the species affected.
Appropriate management of these habitats and sites supporting
any such priority species will be encouraged generally and particularly
by the imposition of conditions on planning permissions, by
the use of planning obligations and by entering management agreements
with landowners and developers where appropriate.
SCHEDULE OF UK KEY HABITATS IN THE BOROUGH OF WARRINGTON1
Swamps and tall herb fen
Reedbeds
Lowland raised bog
Marine cliff and slope
Coastal salt marsh
Estuarine inter-tidal mud flats and sand flats
SCHEDULE OF HABITATS OF LOCAL IMPORTANCE IN THE BOROUGH OF
WARRINGTON2
Ancient semi-natural broadleaved woodland
Species rich plantations and woodlands
Ancient and/or species-rich hedgerows
Peatland
Unimproved and/or species-rich grassland
Coastal & flood plain grazing marsh
Coastal saltmarsh
Mudflats
Wetlands3
Ponds
Reedbeds
Urban commons
1as recorded in A Biodiversity Audit of North
West England, 1999
2 as recorded in Countdown 2004 (A review of local
biodiversity action plans within the Cheshire region)
3 As defined in ‘A Nature Conservation Strategy
for Warrington’ 1995, adopted SPG, Warrington Borough
Council. Includes rivers, canals, brooks, freshwater lakes &
reservoirs and wet meadows.
Policy Derivation:
PPG9
Reason and Explanation:
The key to the protection of wildlife is the protection
of the habitat on which it depends. Protection of wildlife
is not an objective which applies only in specially designated
areas. All the above habitats lend diversity to the local
environment in both landscape and nature conservation terms.
Wetlands and ponds are especially important in providing wildlife
habitats. Warrington Borough contains hundreds of old marl
ponds of high nature conservation value and the Mersey Estuary
provides wetland habitats of international importance.
In 1992, the UK Government signed the Global Biodiversity
Convention at the Earth Summit in Rio De Janeiro. In 1994,
the Government's response to its Rio commitment was to appoint
a Biodiversity Steering Group to identify target species and
habitats for the UK and prepare action plans for each. Target
species and habitats are those that are considered under threat
internationally or have been subject to rapid decline in the
UK. In 1995, the Steering Group published its findings and
initially endorsed action plans for over 100 species and 14
habitats; this figure has now risen to almost three hundred
species and over 25 habitats.
The NW England Biodiversity Steering Group published 'A
Biodiversity Audit for North West England' which listed UK
target species and habitats for the region; some 17 priority
species and 6 Key Habitats (see appendix 9) were identified
for the local authority area of Warrington.
The Council is a committed partner to the 'Countdown Biodiversity
Programme – A Biodiversity Audit with Local Plans for
the Conservation of Wildlife of the Cheshire Region'. This
county-wide initiative advances Biodiversity action plans
at the local level (see appendix 9).
Area of Coverage:
Borough-wide
Other Related Policies:
GRN2, GRN21, DCS2
GRN19 PROTECTED SPECIES
The Council will refuse planning applications for development
that would have an adverse effect upon species of flora and
fauna specially protected by law.
Policy Derivation:
PPG9
Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (amended)
The Protection of Badgers Act 1992
The Conservation (Natural Habitats etc.) Regulations 1994
Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000
Reason and Explanation:
1. It can be an offence to intentionally kill, injure or
take any wild bird or take, damage or destroy its nest whilst
in use. It is not an offence if the act was the incidental
result of a lawful operation, such as a planning permission,
and could not reasonably have been avoided. The Council will,
therefore, require, as appropriate, a nesting bird survey
and may delay commencement works through planning conditions
to fall outside of the breeding season.
2. The presence of a protected species is a material consideration
when the Council is considering a development proposal which,
if carried out, would be likely to result in harm to that
species or its habitat. Suitable precautions can be required
by conditions on planning consents. English Nature has published
specific ‘Great Crested Newt Mitigation Guidelines’
(2001) which will be relevant in parts of the borough.
Area of Coverage:
Borough-wide
Other Related Policies:
GRN2, GRN18, GRN21, DCS2
GRN20 WILDLIFE CORRIDORS
Development within or adjacent to major wildlife corridors
will not be permitted if it is likely to destroy or harm their
integrity, and will be allowed if it preserves or enhances their
role and value through good design and appropriate natural landscaping.
Policy Derivation:
PPG9
Reason and Explanation:
1. Linear biological features can act as ‘corridors’
along which wildlife can move and live. Wildlife corridors
serve as the most effective means of enhancing wildlife diversity
within the borough’s built-up areas. Corridors can be
damaged or rendered unviable by reduction in their width or
by complete severance. Opportunities will also arise through
development proposals to enhance or extend the network of
wildlife corridors.
2. The Council’s Nature Conservation Strategy has
identified the Mersey Valley Corridor and the Sankey Valley
Park as major wildlife corridors and these are shown on the
Proposals Map. The primary consideration in the definition
of these major wildlife corridors is the maintenance of continuous
linkage between the best sites for wildlife and between such
sites and the Council’s Greenway Network; thus facilitating
ease of movement by a wide range of animal, bird, insect and
plant species into parks and open spaces. While some sites
within the designated corridors, if examined in isolation,
may have limited wildlife value, all have potential for improvement,
either through the Council’s own environmental initiatives
or through development control opportunities.
Mersey
Valley Corridor
This constitutes a wide tract of land (exceeding 2kms in
places) extending across the borough from Fiddlers Ferry Power
Station in the west, to Hollins Green and the flood plain
of the River Bollin in the east. Its value lies in the mix
of river valley habitats, notably wetlands, in the context
of the Mersey Estuary as a whole - one of the largest estuaries
in Europe and supporting internationally important numbers
of birds.
The boundary definition of the corridor is based on: -
- Compatibility and linkage with the borough’s greenway
network, green spaces and green belt;
- Compatibility with wildlife corridors identified in ‘A
Nature Conservation Strategy for Warrington’;
- Location, protection and linkage of designated nature conservation
sites;
- Compatibility with the ‘Mersey Estuary Management
Plan’;
- Linkages of existing riverine and wetland habitats;
- Routes of major rivers and canals;
- Linkage to existing or potential wildlife corridors by neighbouring
authorities.
Sankey
Valley Linear Park
This important corridor runs north-south for over 6 kilometres
through Warrington, linking the green belt to the north, to
the River Mersey in the south. It is characterised by ‘new
town’ ecology-led landscaping adjoining Sankey Brook
and the St Helens Canal, and is important for flora and fauna.
The boundary definition of the corridor is based on: -
- Compatibility and linkage with the borough’s greenway
network, green spaces and green belt;
- Compatibility with Wildlife Corridors identified in ‘A
Nature Conservation Strategy for Warrington’;
- The Sankey Valley Linear Park boundary;
- Sankey Brook and its associated flood plain.
3. Secondary wildlife corridors or links are also important
and these primarily consist of:
a) River, canal and brook corridors
b) Transportation network green corridors
c) The hedgerow network
4. These are not shown on the Proposals Map as the detailed
research necessary to define their extent and importance has
not yet been commissioned. Where development proposals arise
their nature conservation importance will however, be assessed
against the provisions of other relevant UDP policies, including
LUT15, GRN10, and GRN21.
5. The object of the policy is to minimise the impact of
new development on areas identified as wildlife corridors,
and not to protect each and every such area regardless of
circumstances. The policy does not imply a general presumption
against all development, especially where the site in question
is in private ownership. The limitations on the Council explained
in the reason and explanation to policy GRN21 apply equally
to this policy. The Council will seek to enhance the wildlife
corridor value of the site in these circumstances. Minor development,
such as the provision of small sub-station sites in heavily
built up areas of the borough which often require to be sited
in ‘green’ areas where there is no suitable alternative,
is not prejudiced by this policy.
Area of Coverage:
Major corridors are shown on the Proposals Map. Secondary
corridors occur throughout the borough.
Other Related Policies:
GRN3, GRN9, GRN12, GRN19, LUT15
GRN21 PROTECTION OF THE NATURE CONSERVATION
RESOURCE
Development proposals affecting protected sites (policies
GRN15, GRN16 & GRN17), threatened habitats (policy GRN18)
or wildlife corridors (policy GRN20), should be accompanied
by:
-
a site survey where necessary to identify features of
nature conservation importance;
-
an assessment of the likely impacts of the development
proposed;
-
proposals for the protection and management of features
identified for retention; and
-
proposals for compensating for features damaged or destroyed
during the development process.
Policy Derivation:
PPG9
Reason and Explanation:
1. This policy makes it clear to developers that, where
there is reason to believe that a site is of nature conservation
importance, the Council will expect proposals to be accompanied
by a detailed appraisal of the nature conservation resource
present and of measures designed to protect, enhance or replace
that resource as appropriate. Consideration of applications
where this policy is relevant will seek to ensure that there
is no net loss of the nature conservation resource as a result
of development.
2. The policy applies alike to designated areas and other
land where conservation value should be maintained.
3. The Council will negotiate with developers to safeguard
nature conservation interests whenever they are threatened
by development proposals. Provided development can be subject
to conditions or a planning obligation that will effectively
limit its impact on wildlife habitats or important physical
features, applications will not normally be refused permission
on nature conservation grounds alone.
4. Ecological surveys to nationally recognised standards
will be required. Habitat and species surveys must be completed
at the correct time of year and of sufficient repetition or
intensity, as appropriate, to permit determination of nature
conservation value.
Area of Coverage:
Borough-wide
Other Related Policies:
As referred to in the policy wording.
GRN22 PROTECTION AND ENHANCEMENT OF LANDSCAPE
FEATURES
Development proposals should identify and protect important
landscape features, such as walls, trees, hedgerows, streams
and ponds and, whenever possible, incorporate these features
into the layout and landscape of the development. Where the
loss of trees, hedgerows or ponds cannot be avoided, replacement
planting or pond construction will be required.
Supplementary Planning Guidance:
Protection of Trees on Development Sites
Draft Supplementary Planning Document
Landscape
Policy Derivation:
PPG9, PPG12, PPG17
Hedgerow Regulations, 1997
Reasons and Explanation:
1. It is a duty of the development plan to conserve the
natural beauty and amenity of the land. This includes retaining
and enhancing the natural assets of sites which come forward
for development or redevelopment, and an effective way of
achieving this is to locate landscape or open space areas
so as to incorporate those features. Wherever possible, the
siting of open space should also take account of features
and open spaces on neighbouring or nearby sites and the potential
for creating visual and functional network links.
2. Trees and hedgerows are of particular value in terms
of visual amenity as well as for nature conservation. The
retention and protection of existing valuable trees and hedgerows
is important in helping to retain the character of the locality
and to enhance the visual quality of new development and its
setting. Tree replacement and landscape enhancement through
tree planting should utilise locally native species where
appropriate.
3. The Hedgerow Regulations 1997 give hedgerows separate
statutory protection. Notice must be given to the Council
before a hedgerow covered by the regulations can be removed.
The Council will then assess the importance of the hedge and
issue consent to remove or a retention notice as appropriate.
Area of Coverage:
Borough-wide
Other Related Policies:
|