sustainability appraisal of reasonable alternatives · pdf filesustainability appraisal of...

Sustainability Appraisal of Reasonable Alternative SitesJanuary 2011

Core Strategy

www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/core-strategy-submission

Development Plans

1

Sustainability Appraisal of Reasonable Alternatives

January 2011

1. Introduction 1.1 The purpose of this report is to identify and assess a range of reasonable

alternatives for the strategic allocation of 2,500 dwellings within Milton Keynes as part of the Core Strategy.

Strategic Reserve Areas

1.2 In the revised pre-submission publication Core Strategy, the four Local Plan strategic reserve sites are allocated for up to 2,500 homes. A plan of the SRAs is shown at Appendix A. Through the sustainability appraisal of MK2031 and previous stages of the Core Strategy, the area south east of the city was consistently identified as a direction for future growth in Milton Keynes Borough. The Pre-Submission Publication Core Strategy (February 2010) had previously allocated up to 7,300 homes in the Milton Keynes part of the South East Strategic Development Area (SE SDA). The allocation of the Strategic Reserve Areas (SRAs) represented a scaling back of the SE SDA to sites previously identified through the Local Plan process. An appraisal of this approach was published in the Sustainability Appraisal addendum alongside the Revised Pre-Submission Publication Core Strategy.

1.3 Since the publication of the revised pre-submission publication document and

associated Sustainability Appraisal Addendum, an assessment has now been undertaken to consider what reasonable alternatives could also be considered to meet the allocation of 2,500 dwellings in the Core Strategy. This report should be read alongside the Core Strategy Sustainability Appraisal Report (February 2010) and the Core Strategy Sustainability Appraisal Addendum (October 2010).

2. Identification of alternative sites 2.1 Previous Sustainability Appraisal work through MK2031 and the Core Strategy

has considered alternative locations for growth. However, these were based on broad areas of growth and larger scale sites accommodating more than 2,500 dwellings. Given the reduction in the numbers, it is considered reasonable to re-consider previously considered sites in order to assess them on an equal basis with the SRAs.

2.2 Given this, a list of basic criteria for identifying sites was drawn up. The following criteria have been used:

1. Must be within the Milton Keynes Borough boundary 2. Sites need to be adjacent to existing or planned urban area 3. Must have capacity for approximately 2,500 dwellings

2.3 The MK Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment and representations

made through the Core Strategy have been used as the basis for identifying possible sites to meet the above criteria. As a result of this search the following sites were identified (see Annex B for location plans):

2

REF DESCRIPTION AREA

(ha) ASSUMED CAPACITY

MKSA1 WEA Expansion 137.48 2,405 MKSA2 East of M1 ‘north’ 300.15 5,252 MKSA3 East of M1 ‘south’ 177.56 3,107 MKSA4 Land following the A421 to the south, with a small

part north of the A421, adjoining the Eastern Expansion Area.

158.74 2,777

MKSA5 South of the A421, extending from site closest to the existing city at Wavendon Gate to the Easterly boundary of Wavendon Golf course. It extends south to the junction of the A5130 with Cross End Road.

163.67 2,864

MKSA6 Abutting the existing city 136.00 2,380 MKSA7 Abutting the existing city and extending south,

crossing the railway line 165.93 2,903

MKSA8 Land south of the Marston Vale Line and north of the Woburn Sands Road

145.94 2,553

MKSA9 Land at Eaton Leys, Levante Gate and land south of Caldecotte/east of the A5.

139.64 2,443

2.4 The assumed capacity is based on the SHLAA assumptions of 50% of a site being developed for housing at a density of 35dph. This makes an allowance for the provision of key infrastructure such as major distributor roads; schools; open spaces, strategic green buffers, employment, facilities serving a wider part of the community (e.g. for leisure or shopping) and other non residential uses, which will generally be required on larger sites. This is only an indicative figure and could be higher or lower in actual delivery.

2.5 Sites MKSA2 and MKSA3 have an assumed capacity that is over 500 dwellings more than the 2,500 threshold. The appraisal has been undertaken on the assumption of only 2,500 dwellings being delivered, but it is acknowledged that these sites could be re-assessed as part of a future review to deliver further housing growth.

2.6 In some cases land between two sites has not been promoted through the SHLAA or Core Strategy, but it was considered that, in order to provide a comprehensive development and to meet the minimum 2,500 dwelling capacity, this land should be included in the appraisal.

2.7 Where smaller sites could come forward on their own, not part of a strategic allocation, they can be assessed on their own merits as part of a Site Allocations DPD if necessary.

2.8 Alternative sites MKSA4, MKSA5, MKSA6 and MKSA7 all include land that

consist of parts of the SRAs. The relationship between the identified alternative sites and the SRAs is shown on the accompanying maps in Appendix B.

3. Appraisal of alternative sites 3.1 All of the sites have been assessed against the MK2031 Sustainability

Appraisal objectives and using the same assumptions, to provide consistency

3

with previous sustainability appraisal work on future areas of growth. It should be noted that a direct comparison with earlier appraisals other than the work undertaken for the SRAs cannot be made due to the differing site boundaries and the reduction in the level of development proposed for each area.

3.2 The full appraisal tables are shown at Appendix C, a summary conclusion for each alternative site is shown below: MKSA1 Conclusion There are negative implications in terms of rural landscape and the impact of development on the Shenley ridge and the countryside beyond. Development could also impact on the villages of Calverton, Upper Weald and Lower Weald and there is a risk of increased congestion. Links to the WEA will be crucial to avoid development being brought forward in a disjointed manner due to the dispersed nature of the sites and to support the sustainability objectives, without these links the sustainability of the option would be compromised.

MKSA2 Conclusion The site is heavily constrained through the location of large areas of flood zone 2 and 3. Aside from flooding issues, there are few other environmental constraints on the site. The site is also large enough to potentially meet future demand beyond 2026. There are possible issues associated with the close proximity to the motorway such as increasing congestion, with subsequent impacts on noise and air quality. The motorway could also act as a barrier to the existing city. Junction 14 is accessible and could lead to increased commuting outside the Borough.

MKSA3 Conclusion The site is relatively unconstrained in environmental terms. A small part is within flood zones 2 and 3 but this is not significant in relation to the size of the site. The main access, without significant investment in new roads east of the M1 outside the site boundary, would be through the Eastern Expansion Area although this may require some re-planning of the EEA which currently benefits from outline planning permission. This could provide opportunities to extend the EEA public transport route but equally could lead to greater congestion within the EEA. Junction 14 of the M1 is potentially accessible through the EEA and could lead to increased commuting outside the Borough.

MKSA4 Conclusion The site generally performs well in social terms although the A421, which separates the site from the Eastern Expansion Area, may act as a barrier to access. The site’s location is likely to increase congestion generally but also on and around routes to the M1 in particular. In terms of environmental constraints, this site has very few. Development in this location will, however, inevitably have an impact on the landscape setting of Wavendon and poses a risk of coalescence if an adequate landscape/open space buffer is not provided.

MKSA5 Conclusion The site generally performs well in social terms although the A421, which

4

separates the site from the Eastern Expansion Area, may act as a barrier to access. The site’s location is likely to increase congestion generally but also on and around routes to the M1 in particular. In terms of environmental constraints, this site has very few. Development in this location will, however, inevitably have an impact on the landscape setting of Wavendon and Woburn Sands and poses a risk of coalescence if an adequate landscape/open space buffer is not provided.

MKSA6 Conclusion In relation to social indicators, the development of 2,500 dwellings in this location scores well because of its location abutting the existing city which will ensure good access to facilities and services. The site’s location is likely to increase congestion generally but also on and around routes to the M1 in particular. Part of the site is in close proximity to the railway line and Woburn Sands station which could support the proposed East West Rail and provide access to the stations to encourage some transport choice. Development in this location will have an impact on the landscape setting of Wavendon and Woburn Sands and poses a risk of coalescence if an adequate landscape/open space buffer is not provided particularly in relation to Wavendon due to the way the site wraps around the edge of the village.

MKSA7 Conclusion There are specific environmental issues on this site, including the existence of a Wildlife Corridor and the site’s location adjacent to the Brickhills Area of Attractive Landscape which is of high landscape quality. In relation to social and economic indicators, the development of 2,500 dwellings in this location does score positively; it will support the east-west rail development, for example. However, the sustainability of this site is compromised by the separation of the site by the railway line. There is also a risk of landscape impacts on and coalescence with Wavendon and Woburn Sands if an adequate landscape/open space buffer is not provided and of increased congestion. Part of the site is in close proximity to the railway line and Woburn Sands station which could support the proposed East West Rail and provide access to the stations to encourage some transport choice.

MKSA8 Conclusion This site generally performs well against social objectives, although the location of the railway could act as a possible barrier to the rest of the city. Although the site rates poorly in environmental terms, it does have some potential positives in supporting East West Rail proposals. There are, however, negative impacts on the Brickhills Area of Attractive Landscape (identified as being of high quality in the Landscape Character Assessment) and a risk of impacting on and coalescence with Bow Brickhill and Woburn Sands if an adequate landscape/open space buffer is not provided. Development could also negatively impact upon the wildlife corridor adjacent to the site and, additionally, it is likely to lead to an increase in congestion on surrounding roads and at points crossing the railway line without improved access. Part of the site is in close proximity to the railway line and Woburn Sands and Bow Brickhill stations which could support the proposed East West Rail and provide access to stations to encourage some transport choice.

MKSA9 Conclusion The site offers opportunities to enhance nearby areas of Bletchley and the Lakes

5

Estate in terms of social sustainability objectives. The development is likely to lead to an increase in congestion, but is in close proximity to the East West Rail line, offering opportunities to encourage some transport choice. The location of a Scheduled Ancient Monument and large areas of flood risk have serious negative environmental impacts that would require mitigation. The site would also have a negative impact on the Brickhills Area of Attractive landscape.

The full appraisal of the SRAs is shown at Appendix D, asummary of the SRAs is shown below. Strategic Reserve Areas Conclusion The site has no significant environmental constraints. In relation to social and economic indicators, the development of 2,500 dwellings in the SRAs does score positively, such as improving housing affordability and reducing crime and the fear of crime. However, the dispersed nature of the SRAs significantly restricts the benefits and overall, the sustainability of the SRAs is reduced by their separate nature. The lack of connection between the sites has particular implications in terms of: achieving a modal shift in transport; the provision of services and facilities; and the efficient use of land, particularly looking at possible future growth (post 2026).

4. Conclusion

4.1 The purpose of the report is to identify reasonable alternatives for a strategic allocation of 2,500 dwellings and compare the sustainability of the sites. Overall the sustainability work has shown that development to the south east of the city performs better than other options, albeit marginally so in some cases. This is primarily due to the relatively low environmental impact (even with some of this being offset by the location in close proximity to the M1). It should be noted that developing on greenfield land means that overall, none of the assessed sites score favourably in relation to the environmental indicators, but some have particular constraints such as flood risk, coalescence or impacts on designated landscapes. Option MKSA1 rates slightly worse than other options partly, but not exclusively, because it is comprised of two sites and is therefore dependent on links to the WEA to achieve some of the sustainability objectives.

4.2 When compared to the SRAs the appraisal shows that joining sites to form a

single development site would have potential benefits, particularly socially and environmentally. The benefits of making a strategic allocation as a single site rather than separate sites were highlighted with the appraisal of the Strategic Reserve Areas in the Sustainability Appraisal Addendum (October 2010). The full appraisal table is shown in Appendix D.

4.3 The Strategic Reserve Areas score positively for their social and economic

impacts and although development is on greenfield land the sites are relatively unconstrained and do not have issues around possible coalescence associated with other alternative options. They are all adjacent to the existing city boundary and provide opportunity to link to either existing grid squares (SR4 to Wavendon Gate/Old Park Farm and SR1, SR2 and SR3 to the Eastern Expansion Area albeit crossing the A421). As individual sites, they

6

are sustainable locations for development and would have a number of positive points. However, as a single strategic allocation (the basis on which they have been assessed) the sustainability of the SRAs is reduced by the separate nature of the sites.

4.4 All the other options have been considered as a single site which has

potentially resulted in them performing better against the sustainability objectives (with the exception of MKSA1 where the site is split into two parts and relies on the WEA to form a single development).

4.5 In the case of both MKSA1 and the SRAs, it may be possible to mitigate some of the issues and areas of uncertainty raised by their dispersed nature through careful masterplanning but not all the impacts can be mitigated against and should not be relied upon to improve the sustainability of the options.

7

Annex A – Strategic Reserve Areas

8

Annex B – All Sites

9

Annex B - MKSA 1

10

Annex B - MKSA 2 and MKSA 3

11

Annex B - MKSA 4

12

Annex B - MKSA 5

13

Annex B - MKSA 6

14

Annex B - MKSA 7

15

Annex B - MKSA 8 and MKSA 9

16

Annex B – Appraisal Tables SA Objective MKSA1: WEA Expansion

Performance Comments/Explanation ST MT LT

1. To improve the health and well-being of the population and reduce inequalities in health

+? +? +? New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage cycling and walking. Sites are divided by WEA and would be reliant on establishing links through WEA to provide comprehensive development linked to the planned city street, Redways and facilities located in the WEA.

2. To reduce crime and the fear of crime

+ ++ ++ New development offers opportunity to design out crime within residential layouts.

3. To reduce social exclusion and improve equality of opportunity amongst social groups

+ + +/- New development can incorporate a mix of dwelling types and tenures to encourage mixed communities as well as providing a range of facilities locally. However, in the long term without suitable controls, this could lead to suburban exclusion problems

4. To improve accessibility and transport links from residential areas to key services, facilities and employment areas

+? +? +? Schools, health centres, dentists, employment areas, retail areas and other services are likely to be provided on a site this size but the sites being divided by the WEA could make delivery more difficult. And would be dependent on establishing links to and through the WEA.

17

SA Objective MKSA1: WEA Expansion


5. To improve housing affordability

++ ++ +/- New development on greenfield sites should be capable of meeting requirements for affordable housing provision. Without delivery of infrastructure and services to support mixed income housing could lead to a negative affect on affordability in growth area.

6. To improve education and achievement levels and skills

+ + +? Opportunities to provide educational facilities alongside new development either on site or as part of expanding planned provision in WEA.

7. To improve local air quality

- - -- Due to greenfield development there is an inevitable worsening of air quality. Efficient public transport is essential to reduce commuting and general impact on air quality, links to the public transport provision along the WEA ‘city street’ will be crucial to minimising these impacts and reducing journeys by car.

8. To reduce road traffic through a modal shift to more sustainable transport modes

- - - Without major coordinated demand management, public transport and spatial development, road traffic is likely to substantially increase longer term. Development area does not support east-west rail but does offer opportunities to link to WEA infrastructure and public transport routes.

9. To reduce road traffic congestion

- -? -? Without major coordinated demand management, public transport and spatial development, congestion is likely to substantially increase longer term. Development area does not support east-west rail but does offer opportunities to link to WEA infrastructure and public transport routes.

10. To improve efficiency in land use through the re-use of previously developed land and existing buildings

- - - Comprehensive design and development of the site, along with higher densities could reduce the impact of development of the land would maximise the efficiency of the land use. However, the site is a greenfield site there will be no reuse of previously developed land and no net improvement in efficiency .

18



11. To reduce waste arisings and increase reuse, recycling and composting

0 - +/- Waste creation will increase overall with an increase in households but new development will provide the opportunity to design in resource efficiency measures.

12. To protect local water resources and improve the quality of surface and groundwater

- - -? Longer term, some potential substantial pressures on water resources, although potential to mitigate by designing in water efficiency measures.

13. To reduce the risk of flooding

0 + + Introduction of SUDS in new development should help to minimise the risk of flooding. Development is not within an area of flood risk.

14. To reduce levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases (GHG) by reducing emissions and maintaining extent of carbon sinks

- - -? Without a major shift from private road transport and extensive use of low carbon technology, GHGs are likely to increase. The increase in emissions from new housing can be reduced through sustainable design.

15. To reduce carbon based energy use by increasing efficiency and production of renewable energy

+ + +/- New development offers opportunity to incorporate extensive energy efficiency and micro renewable measures, to offset the overall increase from new units. Higher densities of new development should increase efficiency. To be effective in the longer term micro renewable measures will need to be designed in at neighbourhood scale. Overall Borough energy use will increase through growth

19



16. To protect and enhance biodiversity and important wildlife habitats

- - -- Shenley Dens site adjoins an area of ancient woodland. The land adjacent to the East, South and the majority of the west boundary is designated as a Wildlife Corridor (Wood Corridor). Land within the Wildlife corridor (55meters from the site boundary) to the south and east of the site is designated as a local wildlife site. Within the Wildlife Corridor and Local Wildlife Site are 7 notable bird species as well as badgers and Hazel Dormice. There are great crested newts 80 metres from the south east boundary of the site

17. To protect, enhance and, where practical, increase access to heritage sites and their settings

0 ? ? Part of the site is adjacent to the conservation area of Lower Weald. Development in this area would also need to protect qualities of the Calverton conservation area.

18. To protect, manage and restore soil resources

- - - Greenfield development impact on land loss. Loss of grade 3 agricultural land.

19. To promote the protection and enhancement of the countryside and landscape character

- -- -- Majority of land considered to be moderate in landscape quality with a small area of moderate/high landscape quality. The southern part of the site would see development along the Shenley Ridge with negative impacts on the character of the surrounding countryside. Development could also impact on the rural character of Calverton, Upper and Lower Weald

20. To improve the vitality of towns and local centres

+ + + Could help to support the services provided within the WEA and Stony Stratford although many services will be provided on site, limiting the support for existing centres.

20



21. To maintain a strong local economy

+ + + Residential development will provide additional workers. Employment land provided as part of the development should contribute to providing additional jobs in the city. Greenfield sites attractive to employers with potential to support a shift to more knowledge based industries.

22. To maintain high and stable levels of employment

+ + + Providing sufficient employment land is included within the development, this should contribute to maintaining high and stable levels of employment. Greenfield sites attractive to employers with potential to support a shift to more knowledge based industries.

Conclusion: There are negative implications in terms of rural landscape and the impact of development on the Shenley ridge and the countryside beyond. Development could also impact on the villages of Calverton, Upper Weald and Lower Weald. Links to the WEA will be crucial to avoid development being brought forward in a disjointed manner due to the dispersed nature of the sites and to support the sustainability objectives, without these links the sustainability of the option would be compromised.

21

SA Objective MKSA2: East of M1 north



+ + +? New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage cycling and walking. Development in close proximity to the motorway with associated noise and, encouraging car use, could mitigate some of this benefit in the long term. The M1 motorway to the West and the A422 to the north may act as a barrier to perceived accessibility to Newport Pagnell and the city.




+ + +/- New development can incorporate a mix of dwelling types and tenures to encourage mixed communities as well as providing a range of facilities locally. However, in the long term without suitable controls, this could lead to suburban exclusion problems.


+ +/- +/- Schools, health centres, dentists, employment areas, retail areas and other services are likely to be provided on a site this size. Development east of the motorway could lead to commuting elsewhere away from key services in CMK. An effective public transport route would need to be provided linking the growth area to the city. Congestion created around motorway junctions could reduce accessibility and site location does not support east-west rail proposals. The motorway could act a s a barrier to integration with the existing city.

22






+ + +? Opportunities to provide educational facilities alongside new development. 2,500 dwellings not sufficient to support secondary school on-site leading to additional pressure for places in Newport Pagnell.


- - -- Traffic congestion around M1 junctions and possible new M1 crossings and journeys into city could lead to reduction in air quality. Efficient public transport is essential to reduce commuting and general impact on air quality. Due to greenfield development there is an inevitable worsening of air quality.


- - -- Development situated near to the M1 (Junction 14) is likely to cause increased private road transport. Without major coordinated demand management, public transport and spatial development, road traffic is likely to substantially increase longer term. Development site would not support east-west rail.


- -? -? Congestion likely to increase around J14 on the M1 with congestion on existing and any additional M1 crossings. Congestion likely to increase unless there is a significant policy backed modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling.



23








0 - - A large part of the site (approximately 25%) falls within flood zones 2 and 3. Introduction of SUDS could help minimise risks in the longer term. The areas of flood risk divide the site in half limiting integration opportunities within the site.


- - -? Without a major shift from private road transport and extensive use of low carbon technology, GHGs are likely to increase. Increase in emissions from new housing can be reduced through sustainable design.



24




- - +/- There could be impacts on biodiversity (wildlife sites in area) and notable species (including bats) in the area. Incorporation of SUDS could have an impact on existing biodiversity. Impact of increased traffic pollution. Long term opportunities to create new habitats through suds and green infrastructure. The River Ouzel, which runs through the proposed site, is a wildlife corridor, containing a number of notable species. There is also a site of 10 species of notable birds to the west of the proposed site, whilst to the east of the site there is a Biological notification site


0 ? ? Area contains potential archaeological notification sites which may be investigated if developed.


- - - Greenfield development impact on land loss. Loss of mostly grade 3 agricultural land.


- - +? Loss of existing greenspace although area is considered to have a low landscape quality. Establishment of green infrastructure around river system could provide long term enhancement.


++ + +? Possible benefits for Newport Pagnell Town Centre although many services will be provided on site, limiting the support for existing centres. Long term there is potential for a new centre east of the motorway created for a new community. . However, this could then negatively impact on Newport Pagnell Town Centre.

25




+? +? +? Residential development will provide additional workers. Employment land provided as part of the development should contribute to providing additional jobs in the city. Greenfield sites attractive to employers . Employment areas east of the M1 likely to attract distribution related lower added value business. Increased road infrastructure required to support such business. Potential for knowledge based industries.


+? +? +? New employment areas created nearer Newport Pagnell which may reduce out-commuting. Transport and distribution related business likely to be low paid. Greenfield sites attractive to employers.

Conclusion: The site is heavily constrained through the location of large areas of flood zone 2 and 3. Aside from flooding issues, there are few other environmental constraints on the site. The site is also large enough to potentially meet future demand beyond 2026. There are possible issues associated with the close proximity to the motorway such as increasing congestion, with subsequent impacts on noise and air quality. The motorway could also act as a barrier to the existing city.

26

SA Objective MKSA3: East of M1 South



+ + +? New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage cycling and walking. Development in close proximity to the motorway, encouraging car use, could mitigate some of this benefit in the long term.






+ +/- +/- Schools, health centres, dentists, employment areas, retail areas and other services are likely to be provided on a site this size. There are potential issues of access through the EEA which could limit accessibility. Close proximity to Junction 14 could also encourage out-commuting. The motorway could act as a barrier to integration with the city. An effective public transport route would need to be provided linking the growth area to the city, the site could link to the planned public transport provision along the EEA ‘city street’ to help mitigate some of the effects of increased traffic.

27






+ + +? Opportunities to provide educational facilities alongside new development. 2,500 dwellings not sufficient to support secondary school on-site leading to additional pressure for places in the EEA.


- - -- Traffic congestion around M1 junction and possible new M1 crossings and journeys into city could lead to reduction in air quality. Efficient public transport is essential to reduce commuting and general impact on air quality. Due to greenfield development there is an inevitable worsening of air quality.


- - -- Development situated near to the M1 is likely to cause significant increased private road transport. Without major coordinated demand management, public transport and spatial development, road traffic is likely to substantially increase longer term. Development does not support east-west rail.


- -? -? Congestion likely to increase unless there is a significant policy backed modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling. Congestion likely to build up around J13 and J14 on the M1 with congestion on existing and possible additional M1 crossings. Also likely to lead to increased congestion along EEA ‘city street’. Improved road network east of the M1 may alleviate some of this congestion but this is outside the site boundary.

28










0 +/- +/- Small part of the site falls within flood zones 2 and 3.

29




- - -? Without a major shift from private road transport and extensive use of low carbon technology, GHGs are likely to increase. Increase in emissions from new housing can be reduced through sustainable design.




- - +/- There could be impacts on biodiversity (local wildlife sites) and notable species in the area. Long term opportunities to create new habitats through suds and green infrastructure although green infrastructure opportunities may be limited by M1 motorway and no connection to existing linear parks system.


0 ? ? Area contains potential archaeological notification sites which may be investigated if developed. Area contains some listed buildings whose setting could be affected as could the setting of Moulsoe.

30




- - - Greenfield development impact on land loss. Loss of mostly grade 3 agricultural land.


- - +? Loss of existing greenspace although area is considered to have a low landscape quality. Establishment of green infrastructure around river system could provide long term enhancement.


+ + +? Could contribute t to vitality of EEA. although many services will be provided on site, limiting the support for existing centres. Long term potential for new neighbourhood centre east of the motorway could lessen positive impact.


+? +? +? Residential development will provide additional workers. Employment land provided as part of the development should contribute to providing additional jobs in the city. Greenfield sites attractive to employers. Employment areas east of the M1 likely to attract distribution related lower added value business. Increased road infrastructure required to support such business. Potential for knowledge based industries.


+? +? +? Greenfield sites attractive to employers. Good links to city will be important to avoid encouraging long distance in-commuting.

31



Conclusion: The site is relatively unconstrained in environmental terms. A small part is within flood zones 2 and 3 but this is not significant in relation to the size of the site. The main access, without significant investment in new roads east of the M1 outside the site boundary, would be through the Eastern Expansion Area. This could provide opportunities to extend the EEA public transport route but equally could lead to greater congestion within the EEA. Junction 14 of the M1 is easily accessible through the EEA and could lead to increased commuting.

32

SA Objective MKSA4: The area of land following the A421 to the south, with a small part north of the A421, adjoining the Eastern

Expansion Area.



+ + + New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage cycling and walking. Development close to the motorway, encouraging car use, could mitigate some of this benefit in the long term. The northern section of the site (north of the A421) will be well situated alongside the Eastern Expansion area and the western edge of the main section of the site will be closely situated to the existing city, so it is likely that existing links, including the Redways could be extended into the area. The A421 separates the majority of the area from the Eastern Expansion area, meaning appropriate links would need to be established.


+ ++ ++ New development offered the opportunity to design out crime.




+ + + Schools, health centres, dentists, employment areas, retail areas and other services are likely to be provided on a site this size. There may also be access from certain parts of the site to services in the Eastern Expansion Area and other areas, to the west, to services in the existing city. The site is not likely to provide much support for, or benefit from, the development of the East-West rail link because the site is not situated adjacent to the railway line. It is likely, however, that existing or proposed bus services would be extended to serve the site. The development is likely to lead to some congestion on the A421.

33

SA Objective MKSA4: The area of land following the A421 to the south, with a small part north of the A421, adjoining the Eastern Expansion Area.





+ + +? A comprehensive site of this size provides the opportunity to provide new primary education facilities. 2,500 dwellings does not generally provide the critical mass for a new secondary school, but due to the site’s location, it could be that a new school could serve a wider area. In the event that a new secondary school was not provided on site, the development will result in an increased pressure on existing schools.


- - -- An increase in traffic created by the new development could lead to a reduction in air quality, particularly if the increased traffic causes congestion. Efficient public transport is essential to reduce commuting and general impact on air quality. Because the site is a greenfield site, development will inevitably result in a worsening of air quality.


- - - Development in the east of the city, near to the M1, is likely to encourage more private transport. The location of the site will not support, or benefit from, the east-west rail development. It is likely that the development would be served by a bus service. It is, however, very likely that overall traffic will increase.


- -? -? Congestion is likely to increase unless there is a significant policy backed modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling. The development can be designed to reduce the need to travel and support modal shift, but congestion on and around routes to the M1 is likely to increase.



34




0 - +/- Waste creation will increase overall with an increase in households, but new development will provide the opportunity to design in resource efficiency measures.


- - -? Longer term potential pressures on water resources from new development, although there is potential to mitigate this by designing in water efficiency measures.


0 + + Development could increase the risk of flooding due to the increased level of hard surfaces. The introduction of SUDS in new development should help minimise the risk of flooding. A small area of the northern tip of the site north of the A421 falls within Flood Zone 2.


- - -? Without a major shift from private road transport combined with the extensive use of low carbon technology, GHGs are likely to increase. The increase in emissions from new housing can be reduced through sustainable design.


+ + +/- New development offers the opportunity to incorporate extensive energy efficiency and micro renewables measures to offset the overall increase from units. Higher densities of new development should increase efficiency. To be effective in the longer term, micro renewable measures will need to be designed in at the neighbourhood scale. Overall, energy use will increase through growth.

35




- - +/- There are no designated sites within the area. There is, however a notable species (Brown Hare) in the area to the north of the A421. Given that the site would be a greenfield development it is likely that it will have a negative impact on biodiversity and wildlife habitats. Construction of SUDS could have a positive impact on biodiversity and wildlife. An increase in traffic pollution may also have a negative impact on biodiversity and wildlife.


0 0 0 There are no listed buildings within the site, although there are two on the outside edge of the site boundary. Any development would need to respect the existing settlement of Wavendon.


- - - Greenfield development will have a negative impact on soil resources. Development of the site will result in the loss of grade 3 agricultural land.


- - +? Greenfield development will inevitably result in the loss of an area’s rural character. However, the landscape in this area is reported to be of poor quality in the Milton Keynes Draft Landscape Character Assessment. The extension of green infrastructure into the site could provide long term enhancement of the landscape character. Also, development will be contained north of Lower End Road which the Local Plan Inspector agreed was the break point between the “Wavendon Settled Ridge” and the “Broughton Urban Edge Plain” which will help to protect the countryside character. Development in this location will, however, inevitably have an impact on the landscape setting of Wavendon and poses a risk of coalescence.


+ + + Development on this site is likely to support Kingston centre and the Eastern Expansion Area local centre. However, it is also likely that many of the services and facilities required by residents will be provided on site, limiting the support the development will provide for existing centres.

36




+? +? +? Residential development will provide additional workers. Employment land provided as part of the development should contribute to providing additional jobs in the city. Due to the site’s location next to the M1, it is possible that employment land in the area will attract distribution related lower added value business.


+? +? +? Providing sufficient employment land is included within the development, this should contribute to maintaining high and stable levels of employment. Greenfield sites are attractive to employers.

Conclusion: The site generally performs well in social terms although the A421, which separates the site from the Eastern Expansion Area, may act as a barrier to access. The site’s location close to the M1 may lead to an increase in congestion. In terms of environmental constraints, this site has very few.

37

SA Objective MKSA5: The area south of the A421, extending from site closest to the existing city at Wavendon Gate to the Easterly

boundary of Wavendon Golf course. It extends south to the junction of the A5130 with Cross End Road.



+ + + New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage cycling and walking. Development close to the motorway, encouraging car use, could mitigate some of this benefit in the long term. The site is well located adjacent to the existing city and the Eastern Expansion Area, so it is likely that existing links, including the Redways, could be extended into the area. The A421 separates the area from the Eastern Expansion Area, meaning appropriate links would need to be established.


+ ++ ++ New development offers the opportunity to design out crime.




+ + + Schools, health centres, dentists, employment areas, retail areas and other services are likely to be provided on a site this size. There may also be access from parts of the site nearer to the A421 to services in the Eastern Expansion Area and other areas. From the western side of the site there may be access to services and facilities within the existing city. The site is not likely to provide much support for, or benefit from, the development of the East-West rail link because the site is not situated adjacent to the railway line. It is likely, however, that existing or proposed bus services would be extended to serve the site. The development is likely to lead to some congestion on the A421.

38

SA Objective MKSA5: The area south of the A421, extending from site closest to the existing city at Wavendon Gate to the Easterly boundary of Wavendon Golf course. It extends south to the junction of the A5130 with Cross End Road.









- - - Development in the east of the city, near to the M1, is likely to encourage more private transport. The location of the site will not support, or benefit from, the east-west rail development. It is likely that the development would be served by a bus service. It is, however, very likely that overall traffic will increase.


- -? -? Congestion is likely to increase unless there is a significant policy backed modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling. The development can be designed to reduce the need to travel and support modal shift, but congestion on and around routes to the M1 is likely to increase.



39








0 + + Development could increase the risk of flooding due to the increased level of hard surfaces. The introduction of SUDS in new development should help minimise the risk of flooding. There are no parts of the site that fall within a Flood Zone.





40




- - +/- There are no designated sites within the site area. There are, however, a number of notable bird species’. Given that the site would be a greenfield development it is likely that it will have a negative impact on biodiversity and wildlife habitats. Construction of SUDS could have a positive impact on biodiversity and wildlife. An increase in traffic pollution may also have a negative impact on biodiversity and wildlife.


-? -? -? There are five listed buildings in the site area and a number more not far from the site boundary. Any development would need to respect the existing settlement of Wavendon. There is also a Scheduled Ancient Monument (Mott Castle) that just falls within the boundary of this site that development would need to respect.


- - - Greenfield development will have a negative impact on soil resources. Development of the site will result in the loss of grade 3 agricultural land.


- - +? Greenfield development will inevitably result in the loss of an area’s rural character. However, approximately half of the landscape in this area is reported to be of poor quality in the Milton Keynes Draft Landscape Character Assessment and the other half is of moderate/poor quality. The extension of green infrastructure into the site could provide long term enhancement of the landscape character. Development in this location will, however, inevitably have an impact on the landscape setting of Wavendon and Woburn Sands and poses a risk of coalescence.


+ + + Development on this site is likely to support Kingston centre and the Eastern Expansion Area local centre. However, it is also likely that many of the services and facilities required by residents will provided on site, limiting the support the development will provide for existing centres.

41




+? +? +? Residential development will provide additional workers. Employment land provided as part of the development should contribute to providing additional jobs in the city. Due to the site’s location close to the M1, it is possible that employment land in the area will attract distribution related lower added value business.



Conclusion: The site generally performs well in social terms although the A421, which separates the site from the Eastern Expansion Area, may act as a barrier to access. The site’s location close to the M1 may lead to an increase in congestion. In terms of environmental constraints, this site has very few. There is, however, a Scheduled Ancient Monument that development would need to take account of.

42

SA Objective MKSA6: The area abutting the existing city, wrapping around Wavendon



+ + + New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage cycling and walking. Development relatively close to the motorway, encouraging car use, could mitigate some of this benefit in the long term. The site is well located adjacent to the existing city, so it is likely that existing links, including the Redways, could be extended into the area.






+ + + Schools, health centres, dentists, employment areas, retail areas and other services are likely to be provided on a site this size. There may also be access from parts of the site nearer to the A421 to services in the Eastern Expansion Area and other areas. From the western side of the site there may be access to services and facilities within the existing city. It is likely, however, that existing or proposed bus services would be extended to serve the site. The development is likely to lead to some congestion on the A421 and the A4146 (Tongwell Street).

43










- - +/- Development in the east of the city, near to the M1, is likely to encourage more private transport. The location of the site could support, the east-west rail development. It is likely that the development would be served by a bus service. It is, however, very likely that overall traffic will increase.


- -? +/- Congestion is likely to increase unless there is a significant policy backed modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling. The development can be designed to reduce the need to travel and support modal shift, but congestion on and around routes to the M1 is likely to increase. The site will support east west rail which could have a positive impact.

44










0 + + Development could increase the risk of flooding due to the increased level of hard surfaces. The introduction of SUDS in new development should help minimise the risk of flooding. There are no parts of the site that fall within a Flood Zone.

45








- - +/- There are no designated sites within the site area. There are, however, a number of notable bird species’. Given that the site would be a greenfield development it is likely that it will have a negative impact on biodiversity and wildlife habitats. Construction of SUDS could have a positive impact on biodiversity and wildlife. An increase in traffic pollution may also have a negative impact on biodiversity and wildlife.


0 0 0 There are no listed buildings within the site, but there are a number of listed buildings close to the boundary of the site. Any development would need to respect the existing settlement of Wavendon.

46




- - - Greenfield development will have a negative impact on soil resources. Development of the site will result in the loss of primarily grade 3, and a small amount of grade 4, agricultural land.


- - +? Greenfield development will inevitably result in the loss of an area’s rural character. However, the landscape in this area is reported to be of moderate/poor quality in the Milton Keynes Draft Landscape Character Assessment. The extension of green infrastructure into the site could provide long term enhancement of the landscape character. Development in this location will, however, inevitably have an impact on the landscape setting of Wavendon and Woburn Sands and poses a risk of coalescence.


+ + + Development on this site is likely to support Kingston centre and Woburn Sands. However, it is also likely that many of the services and facilities required by residents will be provided on site, limiting the support the development will provide for existing centres.


+? +? +? Residential development will provide additional workers. Employment land provided as part of the development should contribute to providing additional jobs in the city. Due to the site’s location close to the M1, it is possible that employment land in the area will attract distribution related, lower added value, business.



47



Conclusion: In relation to social indicators, the development of 2,500 dwellings in this location is particularly positive because of its location abutting the existing city which will ensure good access to facilities and services. The site may contribute to congestion, but this could be reduced by the proximity of the site to the proposed east west rail line. There is a risk of coalescence due to the way the site wraps around the edge of Wavendon.

48

SA Objective MKSA7: The area abutting the existing city and extending south, crossing the railway line



+ + + New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage cycling and walking. Development relatively close to the motorway, encouraging car use, could mitigate some of this benefit in the long term. The northern part of the site is well located adjacent to the existing city, so it is likely that existing links, including the Redways, could be extended into the area. The southern part of site is, however, divided by the railway line so additional work would have to be carried out to provide pedestrian and cyclists routes into the adjoining city.






+ + +? Schools, health centres, dentists, employment areas, retail areas and other services are likely to be provided on a site this size. There may also be access from the northern part of the site to services in the existing city. From the southern part of the site, however, access to services and facilities from the southern part of the site may be more difficult due the existence of the railway line which separates the north section of the site from the south. The site would provide support for, and benefit from, the development of the East-West rail link due to the sites location either side of the railway line. It is also likely that existing or proposed bus services would be extended to serve the site, although serving the southern part of the site may be more difficult, depending on the chosen arrangement for crossing the railway line. The development is likely to lead to some congestion on the A421 and the A4146 (Tongwell Street).

49






+ + +? A comprehensive site of this size provides the opportunity to provide new primary education facilities and, possibly, new secondary education facilities. However, 2,500 dwellings does not generally provide the critical mass for a new secondary school, but due to the site’s location, it could be that a new school could serve a wider area. In the event that a new secondary school was not provided on site, the development will result in an increased pressure on existing schools.




- - +/- Development in the east of the city, relatively close to the M1, is likely to encourage more private transport. The location of the site will support, and benefit from, the East-West rail development. It is also likely that the development would be served by a bus service. It is, however, very likely that overall traffic will increase.


- -? +/- Congestion is likely to increase unless there is a significant policy backed modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling. The development can be designed to reduce the need to travel and support modal shift, but congestion on and around routes to the M1 is likely to increase. The site will support east west rail.

50










0 + + Development could increase the risk of flooding due to the increased level of hard surfaces. The introduction of SUDS in new development should help minimise the risk of flooding. No areas within the site fall within a Flood Zone.

51








- - - The site contains a designated Wildlife Corridor as well as a number of notable species’. The development is, therefore, likely to have a negative impact on biodiversity and wildlife habitats. Construction of SUDS could make a small contribution to mitigating the negative impact of development. An increase in traffic pollution may also have a negative impact on biodiversity and wildlife.


0 0 0 There are no listed buildings within this site. Any development would need to respect the existing settlement of Wavendon.

52




- - - Greenfield development will have a negative impact on soil resources. Development of the site will result in the loss of primarily grade 4, and some grade 3, agricultural land.


- -- -- Greenfield development will inevitably result in the loss of an area’s rural character. However, the landscape in this area is reported to be of moderate/poor quality in the Milton Keynes Draft Landscape Character Assessment. However, the landscape immediately to the south of this site is the Brickhills Greensands Ridge which is of high landscape quality. The extension of green infrastructure into the site could provide long term enhancement of the landscape character of the site itself. Development in this location will, however, inevitably have an impact on the landscape setting of Wavendon and Woburn Sands and poses a risk of coalescence.


+ + + Development may support Walnut Tree Local Centre and Woburn Sands. It is likely that many of the services and facilities required by residents will provided on site, limiting the overall support the development will provide for existing centres.


+? +? +? Residential development will provide additional workers. Employment land provided as part of the development should contribute to providing additional jobs in the city. Due to the site’s location close to the M1, it is possible that employment land in the area will attract distribution related, lower added value, business.



53



Conclusion: There are specific environmental issues on this site, including the existence of a Wildlife Corridor, and the site’s location adjacent to the Brickhills Greensands Ridge which is of high landscape quality. In relation to social and economic indicators, the development of 2,500 dwellings in this location does score positively; it will support the east-west rail development, for example. However, the sustainability of this site is compromised by the separation of the site by the railway line.

54

SA Objective MKSA8: The area south of the Marston Vale Line and north of the Woburn Sands Road



+ + +? New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through neighbourhood living in well designed urban environments that encourage walking and cycling through Redway access, increase public transport usage and access to green infrastructure and the AAL. Part of the development will be in close proximity to the M1, encouraging car use, could mitigate some of this benefit long term. Access to new health facilities on site and existing facilities in Woburn Sands and southern MK.




+ + +? New development can incorporate a mix of dwelling types and tenures to encourage mixed communities. It can also provide a range of community/education/leisure facilities locally. Possible positive impact on the viability of such facilities in Woburn Sands, Bow Brickhill and southern MK. In the long term, it is possible that, without suitable controls, the development may foster suburban exclusion.


+ +/- +/- Schools, health centres, dentists and some retailing and employment along with other services and facilities can be provided within the site. Existing facilities and employment sites within Woburn Sands and the southern MK grid squares are nearby. Development of this site will require new road access over the railway line. The railway line also acts as a barrier and a perceived city boundary. These factors could affect integration with the rest of the city.



55




+ + +? A comprehensive site of this size provides the opportunity to provide new primary education facilities and, possibly, new secondary education facilities. However, 2,500 dwellings will not generally provide the critical mass for a new secondary school. In the event that a new secondary school was not provided on site, the development will result in an increased pressure on existing schools, such as Walton High, although contributions could be made to expand the school.




- - +/- The development is likely to lead to additional traffic. However, the development will support east/west rail, the viability of Bow Brickhill and Woburn Sands stations and should expand bus services in the south of the city, Woburn Sands and Bow Brickhill. Bow Brickhill is currently poorly served by buses.


- -? +/- Congestion is likely to increase unless there is a significant modal shift. The site will support east west rail and should link into the public transport networks in south MK and Woburn Sands which could have a positive impact.


- - - Comprehensive design and development of the site, along with higher densities could reduce the impact of development of the land would maximise the efficiency of the land use. However, the site is a greenfield site there will be no reuse of previously developed land and no net improvement in efficiency.



56




- - -? Longer term potential pressures on water resources from new development, although there is potential to mitigate by designing in water efficiency measures.


0 + + Development could increase the risk of flooding due to the increased level of hard surfaces. The introduction of SUDS in new development should help minimise the risk of flooding.





57




- - +/- Wildlife corridor runs along northern edge of site along the railway line. To the south is the designated Area of Attractive Landscape. There are a number of notable species at the eastern end of the site.


0 0 0 There are no listed buildings or significant heritage sites within or adjacent to the site.


- - - Greenfield development will have a negative impact on soil resources and will result in the loss of mostly grade 3 and some 4 agricultural land.

58




- -- -- Site is in area of moderate/poor landscape quality but it is adjacent to the Brickhills Area of Attractive Landscape. The site acts as a landscape setting area for the AAL. Potential to have significant negative effect. Development of the eastern and western edges of the site would lead to coalescence with Woburn Sands and Bow Brickhill affecting their rural character.


+ ++ ++ Development in this site should help improve the vitality and viability of Woburn Sands and lower order centres in southern MK such as Walnut Tree. Kingston District Centre would be the closest higher order centre to the site. It is likely that many of the services and facilities required by residents will provided on site, limiting the overall support the development will provide for existing centres.



59





Conclusion: This site generally performs well against social objectives, although the location of the railway could act as a possible barrier to the rest of the city. Development on the site could help support the vitality of Woburn Sands. Although the site rates poorly in environmental terms, it does have some potential positives in supporting east west rail proposals. There are, however, negative impacts on the Brickhills Area of Attractive Landscape (identified as being of high quality in the Landscape Character Assessment) and coalescence with Bow Brickhill and Woburn Sands. Development could also negatively impact upon the wildlife corridor adjacent to the site.

60

SA Objective MKSA9: The area of land at Eaton Leys, Levante Gate and land south of Caldecotte/east of the A5.



+ + + New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage walking and cycling through Redway access, increase public transport usage and access to linear parks. Access to new health facilities on site and existing facilities in Bletchley.


+ ++ ++ New development offers the opportunities to design out crime and also potentially assist with the regeneration of the adjacent Lakes Estate


+ ++ ++?

New development can incorporate a mix of dwelling types and tenures to encourage mixed communities. It can also provide a range of community/education/leisure facilities locally and boost the viability of such facilities in the Lakes Estate, Bletchley and Caldecotte. New facilities in the development may help reduce social exclusion in the Lakes Estate and development could contribute to the areas regeneration. In the long term, it is possible that, without suitable controls, the development may foster suburban exclusion.


+ + +? Schools, health centres, dentists and some retailing and employment along with other services and facilities can be provided within the site. Existing facilities and employment sites within Bletchley are nearby. The development is also close to Caldecotte and Tillbrook industrial areas. Development will have to bridge over the river to connect with the Lakes Estate and over/under the railway to Connect with Caldecotte. However, even with sufficient crossings the river and the railway could still act as a barrier between the developments, reducing accessibility. The site integrates well within the existing strategic transport network with links to the A5, V10, Watling Street, the A4146 and potentially east west rail.



61




+ + +? A comprehensive site of this size provides the opportunity to provide new primary education facilities and, possibly, new secondary education facilities. However, 2,500 dwellings does not generally provide the critical mass for a new secondary school and an expansion of nearby facilities would be required. In the event that the level of development did not necessitate as new secondary school further development of the site beyond 2,500 dwellings could support a new secondary school.




- - +/- The development is likely to lead to additional traffic. However, the development will support east/west rail and expand public transport services in the south west of the city and Bletchley. The adjacent Lakes Estate is well linked to the local bus network.


- -? +/- Congestion is likely to increase unless there is a significant modal shift. The development will also wrap round the A5 roundabout which at peak times can be heavily congested. The site will support east west rail and should link into the public transport networks in south west MK and Bletchley which could have a positive impact.



62






- - -? Longer term potential pressures on water resources from new development, although there is potential to mitigate by designing in water efficiency measures.


- --? --? A large portion of the site is within flood zone 3. Green infrastructure, extending linear parks and the use of SUDS should reduce risks to new development.





63




- - - Wildlife corridor runs through the middle of the northern end of the site with AAL designation to the east. The part of the site crossing the A4146 is wholly within the designated AAL. On the whole site, there is a single record of notable species.


- -? --? Development could severely impact on the SAM of the Roman Town of Magovium adjacent to Fenny Stratford. Any development should preserve this area and the surrounding area should be subject to through archaeological investigation


- - - Greenfield development will have a negative impact on soil resources and will result in the loss of grade 3 agricultural land.

64




- -- --- A large portion of the site is within the Brickihills AAL and forms a key part of the landscape setting for the Brickhills. Views to and from the Brickhills would be affected. The area of the site outside the AAL is of moderate/poor landscape quality and could be enhanced through the use of linear park extensions but it is unlikely to be able to mitigate against the harm to the AAL.


+ ++ ++ Development in this site should help improve the vitality of Bletchley Town Centres and lower order centres in southern Bletchley and Fenny Stratford. It is likely that many of the services and facilities required by residents will provided on site, limiting the overall support the development will provide for existing centres.



65





Conclusion: The site offers opportunities to enhance nearby areas of Bletchley and the Lakes Estate in terms of social sustainability objectives. It would also help support the aims of east-west rail, offering opportunities to encourage a modal shift and consequently reduce the negative impacts of development in relation to a number of environmental indicators. However, the location of a Scheduled Ancient Monument and large areas of flood risk have serious negative environmental impacts that would require mitigation. The site would also have a negative impact on the Brickhills Area of Attractive landscape.

66

Annex D – SRA Appraisal Table SA Objective 2,500 dwellings in the SRAs



+? +? +? New development could encourage healthier lifestyles through well designed urban environments that encourage cycling and walking. Development in close proximity to the motorway, encouraging car use, could mitigate some of this benefit in the long term. Also, the disconnected nature of the SRAs means that it may be more difficult to encourage cycling and walking as a form of transport between some of the SRAs and the existing city. SR4 is well connected to the existing city, so it is likely that existing links, including the Redways, could be extended into the SRA. Access from SR2 and SR3 into the existing city may be restricted due to the A421 which separates these SRAs from the Eastern Expansion area. Appropriate links to the EEA would need to be established. Small parts of SR1 adjoin the Eastern Expansion area, so existing links could potentially be extended into this SRA.




+/- +/- +/- New development can incorporate a mix of dwelling types and tenures to encourage mixed communities. It can also provide a range of facilities locally, but the dispersed nature of the SRAs makes this more difficult than if the sites were adjoining. This is because it is less likely that people would travel from one SRA to the other to make use of the facilities, as is the case with the existing grid estate layout, and it would not be feasible to duplicate facilities in each of the SRAs. In the long term, without suitable controls, there is a risk of suburban exclusion.


+/- +/- +/- Schools, health centres, dentists, employment areas, retail areas along with other services and facilities are likely to be provided within the SRAs. The dispersed nature of the sites is likely to limit the provision of some services, or they will not be easily accessible to those living in a different SRA to the one in which the facility or service is provided.. SR4 and small parts of SR2 will be in walking distance of existing local services and facilities. In terms of schooling, however, existing provision may not have the capacity to accommodate further development. All but one of the SRAs are located away from the East-West rail link. The one adjacent SRA only has a small area adjoining the line. The development is likely to lead to some congestion on the A421. The dispersed nature of the sites will make it difficult to provide a good bus service. These factors will make key services, facilities and employment areas less accessible.

67

SA Objective 2,500 dwellings in the SRAs



++ ++ +/- New development on greenfield sites should be capable of meeting requirements for affordable housing provision. A lack of infrastructure and services to support mixed income housing could lead to a negative affect on affordability by increasing travel costs for homes in the SRAs.


+/- +/- +/- New development provides the opportunity to provide new primary educational facilities. However, a figure of 2,500 dwellings does not provide the critical mass to provide secondary and further education which will result in increased pressure on existing education facilities. The dispersed nature of the SRAs will also make it more difficult to provide education facilities than it would be if they were connected.


- - -- An increase in traffic created by the new development could lead to a reduction in air quality, particularly if the increased traffic causes congestion. Efficient public transport is essential to reduce commuting and general impact on air quality; the dispersed nature of the SRAs, however, is likely to make the provision of efficient public transport difficult. Due to greenfield development there is an inevitable worsening of air quality.


- - -- Development in the east of the city, near to the M1, is likely to encourage more private transport. The location of the SRAs will not support east-west rail and the dispersed nature of the sites means that the provision of good public transport will be difficult. It is very likely that road traffic will increase.


- - -- Congestion is likely to increase unless there is a significant policy backed modal shift to public transport, walking and cycling. The SRAs can be designed to reduce the need to travel and support modal shift but will be difficult given the dispersed nature of the SRAs. Congestion on and around routes to the M1 is likely to increase.


- - - Higher densities could reduce the impact but the SRAs are greenfield sites meaning there would be no reuse of previously developed land. Overall, it is considered that the dispersed nature of the SRAs means that the sustainability is compromised because it offers less opportunity to maximise land efficiency through comprehensive planning of one individual site, with the risk of achieving lower densities. Also – if strategic landscape buffers are created around each of the SRAs, the long term sustainability of this part of the city, in terms of future growth (post 2026), may be compromised.

68






- - -? Longer term potential pressures on water resources from new development, although potential to mitigate by designing in water efficiency measures.


0 + + Development could increase the risk of flooding due to the increased level of hard surfaces. Introduction of SUDS in new development should help to minimise the risk of flooding. However, the dispersed nature of the SRAs significantly limits the potential to provide a comprehensive and more effective SUDS system. There is only one small area of the SRAs which is within a flood zone; the northern tip of SR1 falls within Flood Zone 2.


- - -? Without a major shift from private road transport and extensive use of low carbon technology, GHGs are likely to increase. The increase in emissions from new housing can be reduced through sustainable design.


+ + -/+ New development offers the opportunity to incorporate extensive energy efficiency and micro renewables measures to offset the overall increase from new units. Higher densities of new development should increase efficiency. To be effective in the longer term, micro renewable measures will need to be designed in at the neighbourhood scale. Overall, energy use will increase through growth.

16. To protect and enhance

- - -/+ There are no designated sites in the SRAs but there would be impacts on biodiversity and notable species (including badgers) through greenfield development. Long term opportunities to create new habitats through green

69



biodiversity and important wildlife habitats

infrastructure. Construction of the SUDs could have an impact on existing biodiversity. Impact of increased traffic pollution.


0 0 0 There are no listed buildings within the SRAs themselves although there are some along the boundaries of the SRAs. There are no Heritage Sites within the SRAs.


- - - Greenfield development will have a negative impact on soil resources. Development of the SRAs will result in the loss of primarily grade 3 agricultural land, with a small area of grade 4 agricultural land in SR4 which are poorer quality agricultural land.


- - +? Greenfield development results in loss of area’s rural character. However, the landscape in three of the four SRAs is reported to be of poor quality in the Milton Keynes Draft Landscape Character Assessment, and the quality of the landscape in SR4 is reported to be of moderate/poor quality. Expansion of green infrastructure could provide long term enhancement of the landscape character. Also, development will be contained north of Lower End road which the Local Plan Inspector agreed was the break point between the “Wavendon Settled Ridge” and the “Broughton Urban Edge Plain” which will help to protect the countryside character.


+ ++ ++ Three of the SRAs are likely to support Kingston District Centre and Eastern Expansion Area facilities and provision. SR4 may support Old Farm Park and Walnut Tree Local Centres. The SRAs may be more likely to support neighbouring town, district and local centres because of their size and dispersed nature which may mean that it is not feasible to locate such a wide range of facilities within each of the SRAs themselves.


+? +? +? Residential development will provide additional workers. Employment land provided as part of the SRAs should contribute to providing additional jobs in the city. With their location near to the M1, it may be that employment land in the SRAs attracts distribution related lower added value business.

70




+? +? +? Providing sufficient employment land is included within the SRAs, this should contribute to maintaining high and stable levels of employment. Greenfield sites are attractive to employers.

Conclusion: In terms of environmental sustainability indicators, the very nature of developing on greenfield land means that the development of 2,500 dwellings in the SRAs is not favourable in relation to these indicators. In relation to social and economic indicators, the development of 2,500 dwellings in the SRAs does score positively, such as improving housing affordability and reducing crime and the fear of crime. However, the dispersed nature of the SRAs significantly restricts the benefits and overall, the sustainability of the SRAs is undermined by their dispersed nature. The lack of connection between the sites has particular implications in terms of: achieving a modal shift in transport; the provision of services and facilities; and the efficient use of land, particularly looking at possible future growth (post 2026).

Milton Keynes CouncilSpatial PlanningCivic Offices1 Saxon Gate EastCentral Milton KeynesMK9 3EJ

T 01908 252599F 01908 252330E [email protected]

M10572

Available in audio, large print, braille and other languages

01908 252599

www.milton-keynes.gov.uk/core-strategy-submission

sustainability appraisal of reasonable alternatives · pdf filesustainability appraisal of...

Documents