Flood Risk Sequential Assessment

Beeston Business Park, Beeston, Nottinghamshire

Prepared on behalf of: M7 Real Estate LLP

PlanIT Planning and

Development Ltd

2

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

3.0 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL

4.0 PLANNING POLICY AND FLOOD RISK

5.0 SCOPE OF SEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT

6.0 THE SEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT

7.0 CONCLUSION

Appendix 1 – Site Location Plan

Appendix 2 - Masterplan

3

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 This Flood Risk Sequential Assessment report has been prepared by PlanIT on

behalf of M7 Real Estate LLP. It accompanies a planning application proposing a

residential led mixed use redevelopment of land at Beeston Business Park. A plan

showing the extent of the application site can be found at Appendix 1.

1.2 The planning application has been submitted as a ‘hybrid’ planning application.

Outline planning permission is sought for the residential element and full planning

permission is sought for the commercial element. A full description of the proposed

development can be found in the Planning Supporting Statement.

1.3 The planning application site is predominantly previously developed land which

extends to some 19.6 hectares (48.6 acres). The proposed development is divided

into two separate areas. Commercial and residential development is proposed on

the northern part of the site and will include the retention of existing industrial units,

two new ‘business centre’ office blocks, light industrial ,retail units and associated

car parking. The residential element is on 6.23 hectares of the site. The

development in the southern area includes sports pitches and a new pavilion and

social club building including squash courts; a discrete parcel of land fronting South

Road and Trent Vale Road, is also proposed for residential development; this will

contribute c25units within an overall residential development of between 200-250

units. A copy of the indicative masterplan that forms part of the planning application

is attached in appendix 2.

1.4 The planning application has been submitted with a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA)

prepared by BWB Consulting. The FRA confirms that The Environment Agency

Flood Maps for Planning identify the site as falling within Flood Zones 3 and 2. A

copy of the Environment Agency Flood Risk Map is set out below. Following the

advice in the National Planning Policy Framework (The Framework) it is necessary

for a sequential test to be submitted with the planning application to demonstrate to

the Local Planning Authority (LPA) that no other development sites at a lower flood

risk are available for the proposed development. The scope of the sequential test

has been agreed with Officers during the course of the pre-application discussions.

4

Figure 1: EA Flood Risk Map

1.5 Table 2 of the Framework Technical Guide classifies land use. Under these

classifications the proposed development use, which includes residential

development, is considered to be a ‘More Vulnerable use’. Table 3 of the Framework

Technical Guide identifies that a ‘More Vulnerable’ development proposed within

Flood Zone 3 is considered to be ‘appropriate’ if it can satisfy the requirements of the

‘Exception Test’. Part of the proposed residential development falls within an area

classified by the EA as Flood Zone 3. The accompanying FRA therefore addresses

the requirements of the Exceptions Test and concludes that the requirements of the

Exceptions test can be passed.

5

2.0 SITE DESCRIPTION

2.1 A detailed description of the application site and the surrounding area can be found

in the accompanying Planning Statement and Design and Access Statement. The

key features of the application site are set out below:

The application site is predominantly previously developed land. The vast

majority of the proposed built development will be on the previously

developed part of the site.

The site is approximately 19.6 hectares in size.

The site broadly comprises two separate parcels of land. The northern section

of the site is boarded to the north by a railway line, (The Midland Mainline) to

the east by Meadow Road and Trent Road, to the South by the rear gardens

of the properties access of Trent Vale Road and to the west by a tree belt with

a nature reserve beyond. The southern section of the site comprises a sports

ground and is boarded to the north by Trent Vale Road, to the east by South

Road and the rear gardens of the properties with access off Trent Road.

A watercourse, (name unknown - tributary of the River Trent) is present within

the south west of the northern section. This is understood to essentially be an

open section of surface water sewer to which the majority of the northern

section drains to.

There are a variety of land uses surrounding the site. This includes

substantial areas of residential development, areas of public open space

including the Chilwell Manor golf course, commercial development to the

north east and the Attenborough Nature Reserve to the west.

The site is in a sustainable location for development with good access to

services, facilities, job opportunities and sustainable transport links, including

Beeston train station to the north.

6

3.0 DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL

3.1 The planning application has been submitted as a hybrid planning application.

Outline planning permission is sought for the residential element of the proposal

and full planning permission is sought for the commercial element. The submitted

masterplan shows the proposed arrangement of the land uses;it can be found at

Appendix 2 of this report. The accompanying Planning Statement and Design and

Access Statement provides a detailed description of the proposed development.

The key elements of the proposed development include:

Retained commercial buildings (shown shaded grey on the masterplan)

Rail station parking – 0.15ha

Two Motortrade units – each 325sqm/3,500sqf unit.

Terrace of 4x Retail/Crèche units – totalling 420sqm/4,500sqft unit

Additional office car parking

Food retail – 420sqm/4,500 sqft unit

Medical centre – 464 sqm (16,380 sq ft)

Two ‘business centres’ each providing 3,250sqm/35,000sqft of floorspace

Eleven light industrial/trade counter units providing 230sqm/2,500sqft of

floorspace each

Fifteen light industrial units of 465sqm/5,000sqft each

6.23ha of residential development on the northern section of the site

0.67ha of residential development on the southern section of the site

A pavilion, social club and squash courts

Sports pitches

A Local Area of Play (LAP)

Associated infrastructure

3.2 It should be noted that whilst there are a range of land uses proposed across the site,

the range of uses have been identified to reflect occupier interest and to ensure

scheme viability. The residential element of the proposed development will be sold to

a house builder; the land receipt from that land sale will subsidies the development of

the commercial elements of the scheme. The proposed range of land uses are

therefore a “package” which cannot be disaggregated for the purposes of the

sequential test.

7

4.0 PLANNING POLICY AND FLOOD RISK

Nation Planning Policy Framework

4.1 In March 2012 the Government published the National Planning Policy Framework

(The Framework). This document replaces the Government’s previous planning

guidance of flood risk set out in PPS25 – Development and Flood Risk. The

Framework also advises that all existing local planning policies should be read in

conjunction with The Framework. Where there is a conflict between existing

planning policies and The Framework the weight that should be applied to existing

policies in the decision making process should be reduced (paragraph 215).

4.2 The Framework confirms that the aim of the Sequential Test is to steer new

development to areas with the lowest risk of flooding. Developments should not be

permitted if there are reasonable alternative sites available for the proposed

development in areas with a lower probability of flooding. A sequential approach

should be used in areas known to be at risk of any form of flooding.

4.3 If, following application of the Sequential Test, it is not possible or consistent with

wider sustainability objectives for the development to be located in zones with a

lower probability of flooding, the Exception Test can be applied if appropriate. For

the Exception Test to be passed:

It must be demonstrated that the development provides wider sustainability

benefits to the community that outweigh flood risk, informed by a Strategic

Flood Risk Assessment where one has been prepared; and

A site-specific flood risk assessment must demonstrate that the development

will be safe for its lifetime taking account of the vulnerability of its users,

without increasing flood risk elsewhere, and, where possible, will reduce flood

risk overall.

4.4 Both elements of the test will have to be passed for development to be allocated or

permitted. The accompanying FRA prepared by BWB Consulting addresses the

requirements of the Exception Test.

8

Technical Guidance to the Framework

4.5 The Technical Guidance to the Framework provides further guidance on the use of

the Sequential and Exception Tests. It is the confirmed aim of the Sequential Test

to steer the development to areas with the lowest probability of flooding. The EA

Strategic Flood Risk Assessment and the EA Flood Maps for Planning should be

the starting point for the sequential test.

4.6 Flood Zones 2 and 3 are shown on the EA Flood Maps, with Zone 1 being all land

falling outside of Zones 2 and 3. Developments should be directed towards the

zones with the lowest floor risk where possible. Where there are no reasonable

available sites in Flood Zone 1, local planning authorities when allocating land in

Local Plans or determining planning applications for development at any particular

location, should take into account the flood risk vulnerability of land uses as set out

in Table 2 of the Framework’s Technical Guidance and consider reasonably

available sites in Flood Zone 2 applying the exceptions test if required. Only where

there are no reasonably available sites in Flood Zone 1 or 2 should the

sustainability of sites in Flood Zone 3 be considered, taking into account the flood

risk vulnerability of land uses and applying the exceptions test if required.

4.7 Table 1 – Flood Zones, of the technical guidance confirms the types of development

that are appropriate within each Flood Zone. There are no restrictions on the types

of land uses appropriate within Flood Zone 1. In Flood Zone 2, it is advised that

‘essential infrastructure’, ‘water compatible developments’, ‘less vulnerable’ and

‘more vulnerable’ uses are appropriate. ‘Highly vulnerable’ uses are only

appropriate in Zone 2 if the Exceptions Test is passed. In Flood Zone 3a ‘water

compatible’ and ‘less vulnerable’ uses are appropriate. ‘More vulnerable uses’

should only be permitted if the exception test is passed.

4.8 Table 2 – Flood Risk Vulnerability Classification, confirms that residential

development is a ‘more vulnerable use’. Residential development on the

Application Site is, therefore, only appropriate subject to the Sequential Test and

Exception Test being passed.

9

Broxtowe Borough Local Plan

4.9 Broxtowe Borough’s adopted planning policies are contained in the Broxtowe Local

Plan (2004) which will be gradually replaced over the coming years by new

Development Plan Documents in the Local Development Framework. The Local

Plan was adopted in September 2004 and is the main reference document for

forward planning in the Borough. It shows all the land allocated for development to

cover requirements up to 2011. It includes current planning policies against which

new development proposals are judged. However, The Plan’s policies must be read

in conjunction with the policies in the NPPF (The Framework). The weight afforded

to the policies in the local plan should be based on their consistency with The

Framework.

4.10 Local Plan Policy E28 advises that:

“Planning permission will not be granted for development within the

High Flood Risk areas shown on the Proposals Map, and within other parts

of the catchments of the rivers Trent and Erewash, which would increase

the risk of flooding.”

4.11 The policy allows for development in areas of flood risk provided that it ‘would not

increase the risk flooding’. The policy’s supporting text advises that the definition of

‘high’ flood risk can be found at Table 1, para 30 of PPG25, which provides guidance

about the acceptability of development in Flood Zone 3. Applications for

development in these areas will need to be accompanied by a flood risk

assessment to demonstrate how the risk of flooding can be satisfactorily

addressed. The flood outline shown on the Proposals Map does not take

account of the completed River Trent flood defences; they should be taken into

account when considering the related flood risk.

4.12 The relevant extract from the Local Plan Proposals Map is set out below. It should be

noted that PPG25 has now been superseded by the guidance in The Framework and

the accompanying Technical Guidance. Therefore the references in the Policy to

PPG25 are out of date.

10

Figure 1 – Local Plan Proposals Map Extract

Broxtowe Borough Aligned Core Strategy

4.13 Broxtowe District Council have submitted a Core Strategy to the Secretary of State for

Examination. The Examination has now been completed. At the close of the Core

Strategy Examination Hearing Sessions, the Inspector issued a letter requesting

additional work to be done by the Local Authority before the Core Strategy can be

progressed towards adoption. In response to this letter Broxtowe are considering

modifications to the Core Strategy and intend to notify the Inspector of their response

in due course.

4.14 As the Core Strategy is not adopted it carries limited weight in the decision making

process. It is, however, noted that Policy 1 -Climate Change, of the submission draft

plan advises:

11

“Development proposals that avoid areas of current and future flood risk and

which do not increase the risk of flooding elsewhere and where possible reduce

flood risk, adopting the precautionary principle, will be supported.

Where no reasonable site within Flood Zone 1 is available, allocations in Flood

Zone 2 and Flood Zone 3 will be considered on a sequential basis.

Where it is necessary to apply the Exception Test within the urban areas, the

following factors will taken into account when considering if development has

wider sustainability benefits to the community that outweigh flood risk:

a) there are exceptional and sustainable circumstances for locating the

development within such areas, including the necessary re-use of brownfield

sites; and

b) the risk can be fully mitigated by engineering and design measures.”

4.15 Whilst Policy 1 of the emerging Core Strategy is not an adopted policy its guidance

on development in areas of flood risk is closely aligned to the guidance the

Framework.

Broxtowe Site Allocations Issues and Options Discussion Document

4.16 Broxtowe Council undertook public consultation on the 'Issues and Options' Site

Allocation document in December2013/January2014. When adopted, the Site

Allocations Document will replace the Saved Policies of the existing Broxtowe Local

Plan. This new plan will align to policies within the Core Strategy.

4.17 Section 6 – Main Built Up Area Allocations. This chapter of the document identifies

potential locations for residential and commercial development in Beeston and the

other key settlements of Stapleford, Attenborough, Bramcote, Chilwell, Toton and

Nuthall East & Strelley wards. Given that the Site Allocations document is in the

early stages of preparation it can be afforded limited weight as a policy document at

the present time. However, the potential locations for development identified by the

Issues and Options consultation draft document have been used to inform the

sequential site search and the availability of alternative development locations.

12

4.18 The application site is identified as site H499 – Beeston Business Park, Technology

Drive, Beeston. It is advised that:

“Part of a wider former telecoms site and Enterprise Zone (EZ), could come forward in the near future as some form of mixed development (in discussion) although timescales remain unresolved. No significant constraints to residential development expected on the South Eastern quadrant of the site for 200 homes. Further work required to demonstrate delivery in 0-5 years.”

Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) 2012

4.19 The Broxtowe SHLAA was published in March 2012. The purpose of SHLAA is to

identify sites which may have the potential to accommodate new housing

development. The study assesses sites to establish their suitability, availability and

achievability and forms part of the evidence base that will be used to inform the

emerging Local Development Framework (LDF).

4.20 The SHLAA includes land that has come forward from a range of sources, including

sites that have already been granted planning permission and sites that have been

put forward by landowners and developers. The SHLAA has been used to inform the

sequential test by identifying potential alternative locations for development.

13

5.0 SCOPE OF SEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT

5.1 Prior to the preparation of the sequential test Broxtowe Council were contacted in

order to establish the scope of the report. A letter was sent to Ms Emma Palmer-

Barnes on the 8th December 2013 setting out the proposed scope for the sequential

test. The letter suggested that the sequential test report adopted the following

approach to identify the availability of alternative sites:

1) Sites within defined settlement boundaries are sequentially preferable locations

for development than sites outside of the defined settlement boundaries in

accordance with the requirements of Local Plan Policy H7.

.

2) The majority of the site is brownfield, the greenfield parcel of land on the southern

edge of the site to the south of Trent Vale Road which will be used mainly for

sports pitches with a small section intended for residential. Greenfield sites are,

therefore, sequentially less preferable locations for development compared to the

application site.

3) The uses cannot be desegregated because a comprehensive approach to the

regeneration of the site is required. The sequential test will, therefore, consider

alternative sites which are large enough to accommodate the whole of the

proposed development.

4) Alternative sites should have the required infrastructure and be in a location

which is suitable for accommodating the range of proposed uses.

5.2 The scope of the sequential test was also discussed with the Case Officer during

the course of a pre-application meeting. The case officer advised that the sequential

test for Boots and Severn Trent strategic site should be used to help inform the

sequential test for the Beeston Business Park. Section 8 – Alternative Sites, part b)

Criteria for Search, of the sequential test report for the Boots and Severn Trent site

(December 2011) advises that the Boots and Severn Trent site was identified as a

strategic site by the LPA due to its:

Size and critical mass in supporting housing (Policies 4, 7 of ACS)

Brownfield status and regeneration potential (Policy & ACS)

Nil impact on Green Belt (Policy 3 ACS)

14

Sustainability and proximity to existing infrastructure, services and

communities (Policies 2,14,15,18 of ACS)

5.3 The Boots and Severn Trent site shares a number of characteristics with the

Beeston Business Park, albeit the Boots and Severn Trent site is significantly larger

than the application site (124ha). They are in close proximity to one another; the

Boots and Severn Trent site lies to the north east of the application site separated

by an area of residential development. Both proposals will have no impact on the

Green Belt. Both developments comprise a mixed use development providing

residential and commercial development.

5.4 The sequential test for the Boots and Severn Trent site looked for alternative sites

within the administrative areas of Broxtowe Borough Council and Nottingham City

Council. This approach reflected the size and location of the site which straddles

both Local Authority areas. Advice was provided at the pre-application meeting that

the sequential search for the Beeston Business Park site should be restricted to the

administrative area of Broxtowe Borough Council.

5.5 In preparing the sequential test for the Boots and Severn Trent site, sites were

selected which were equal to or greater in size than Nottingham City’s and

Broxtowe Borough’s strategic allocations. A similar approach has been adopted for

this sequential search. Sites that are not of sufficient size to accommodate the

proposed development have been dismissed. In order to adopt a robust approach

sites that are 15.7ha in size (80% the size of the application site area) or greater

site have been assessed.

15

6.0 THE SEQUENTIAL ASSESSMENT

6.1 The sequential assessment has been prepared in order to establish if there are any

sequentially preferable sites available for the proposed development based on the

approach to site selection identified in Chapter 5 of this report. The Council’s Site

Allocations Issues and Options Discussion Document and SHLAA have been used

to identify potential alternative locations for development as agreed with officers at

pre-application meetings.

6.2 Paragraph M6.1.5 of the Site Allocations Issues and Options advises that the sites

listed in the table on pages 45 to 47 of the document are potential development

sites identified by the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment. This list of

sites has, therefore, been used to help identify alternative locations for the proposed

development. Sites identified in the table that follows paragraph M6.1.5 of the Site

Allocations Issues and Options have been excluded from the assessment if they fall

below the lower size search threshold (15.7ha). Alternative sites within Broxtowe

Borough Council which were identified by the Boots and Severn Trent site

sequential test have also been reassessed for their suitability.

6.3 Sites identified in Table 4 – Green Belt Sites, of the Site Allocations Issues and

Options Discussion document are not considered to be sequentially preferable

locations for development due to their Green Belt Status. The development of

Green Belt sites is prevented by the NPPF unless ‘very special circumstances’ can

be demonstrated. For completeness and ease of reference these Green Belt sites

have, however, been identified in Table 1 – Assessment Sites, below.

6.4 Table 1 below identifies and assesses the suitability of alternative sites based upon

the approach identified in the ‘Scope of Sequential Assessment’ (chapter No.5) of

this report; it also follows the approach in Table 1 of the Boots and Severn Trent

Sequential Site Search.

16

Table 1 – Assessment Sites

Site Reference Number

Site Name Size Flood Zone Reasonably Available

Site Suitability

Outside Green Belt

PDL Regeneration Opportunities

Transport Services Sustainability

Overall Assessment

1 Boots (Nottingham) and Boots and Severn Trent Land

125ha Flood Zone 3 Potentially available, however Issues and Options Site Allocations Document advises the site is not available for 6 + years

Yes Yes Yes Good The site may not be immediately available. The site incomparable in size to the application site. It is close to 7 times larger than the application site. The site is in the same flood zone as the application site and is not, therefore, sequentially preferable. - Dismiss

2 Field Farm, Stapleford

28 ha Part of the site is within the functional floodplain (Zone 3b) of Boundary Brook and part is within the 1 in 100 year floodplain (Zone 3a)

Yes Yes No No– The site is greenfield. The Issues and Options Site Allocations DPD advises that the site will not provide any notable employment opportunities

Good The site is greenfield. The Issues and Options Site Allocations DPD advises that there is no commercial land proposed. It will not have the same regeneration and job creation benefits as the application site.. The site is in the same flood zone as the application site and is not, therefore, sequentially preferable. - Dismiss

3 Land in the vicinity of the proposed HS2 station at Toton

73ha Site within Flood Zone 1

Unknown, planning application submitted on part of site. Landowner intentions not known.

Yes No Regeneration potential with HS2

Good The site is greenfield and therefore a sequentially less preferable location for development. Availability of site uncertain, planning application submitted but not determined. The site is incomparable in size (close to 4 times larger) compared to the application site. - Dismiss

17

4 The Boots Company Beeston site

18.6ha EA Maps suggest over 1/2 site is in Flood Zone 2 (1 in 100 or greater)

Unknown - Site in employment use, tenancies and lease agreement not known. Issues and Options Site Allocations document advises site will not be available until the medium term.

Yes Yes Limited - Issues and Options Site Allocations DPD advises that the site will not provide any employment opportunities

The Site Allocations Issues and Options document advises that there are highways capacity issues at peak times

Site potentially unavailable. Site is likely to be contaminated and remediation would be required. Highways constraints to be resolved. - Dismiss

5 Land off Moss Drive Bramcote

23.7ha 1 Yes No Site predomin-antly greenfield

Limited Good Green Belt and predominantly greenfield site. The Local Plan Review 2003 Inspector considered that developing the South of the site would create unrestricted urban sprawl, and as the land is best and most versatile agricultural land the site is undesirable for development. Development of the Northern part of the site would be prominent when viewed from the South creating significant encroachment into the countryside which would poorly relate to the built form of Bramcote. - Dismiss

6 Land Between A52 Stapleford And Chilwell Lane

34.7ha 1 Yes No No None Good Green Belt site. Constraints include noise issues from the A52, exposed site on rising land , rights of way through the site and adjacent land needed for acceptable access. If the site were developed in its entirety it would physically link Chilwell to Stapleford creating coalescence. - Dismiss

18

6 Land at Woodhouse Way Nuthall

32.4ha 1 Yes No No None Issues and options Allocations DPD advises that there is sufficient road network capacity

Green Belt site. Mainly good quality agricultural land. Considered for employment in the Local Plan Inquiry 2003. Inspector concluded development would represent a major encroachment and coalescence risk.Tribal SUE report also concluded the site to be unsuitable due to coalescence risk. Part of site a designated Site of Importance for Nature Conservation. - Dismiss

7 Land at Wheatgrass Farm Chilwell

28.9ha 1 Yes No No None Ok Green Belt site. Existing footpaths may need to be diverted to allow for development, NET route would limit development but will act as a defensible boundary. The Tribal SUE was less in favour of development on the East side of Toton Lane due in part to the prominent rising land in this area. Power lines cross the site. Local Plan Review 2003 Inspector concluded that the site, even if it is less sensitive than other parts of this open area, is an important and integral area of countryside. The Inspector also recognised importance of site for recreational purposes. - Dismiss

19

8 Toton Sidings Derby Road Stapleford

20.3ha EA flood risk maps suggests that more than half the site is in flood zone 2

No - access constraint

No Yes Limited Site Allocations Issues and Options document advises no easy road access. But will gain access to A52 as part of HS2 hub station

Green Belt in the Broxtowe Local Plan (2004) but identified as a Major Developed Site indicating the potential for some redevelopment. Other constraints include flood zone and SINC. The former sidings use would require remediation and access to the site is only realistically possible through site 133 to the North of Toton. In the absence of development on site 133 this site is considered to be undeliverable and undevelopable within the plan period. - Dismiss

9 Field Farm Land north of Ilkeston Road Stapleford

27.9ha 1 Yes No No None Good The site is in the Green Belt. There are Tree Protection Orders on site proposed to be retained and 39 per cent of the site is best and most versatile agricultural land. - Dismiss

10 Land at Toton Lane Stapleford

41.5ha 1 Yes No No None Good Part of a narrow Green Belt gap (mixed Grade 2, 3b and 3a agricultural land) between Toton and Stapleford. - Dismiss

11 Land Between Elton And The Woodards Bilborough Road Trowell

26.3ha 1 Yes No No None Good The site is located within the Green Belt, adjacent to Bilborough Road and in part the settlement of Bilborough in Nottingham City.-Dismiss

12 Spring Farm Nottingham Road Trowell Moor Trowell

69.3ha 1 Yes No No None Moderate access to services and facilities

The site is located within the Green Belt. The recent publication of the preferred route for a High Speed 2 Railway shows the line to dissect the North West corner of the site which could create noise issues and reduce the developable space. - Dismiss

20

13 Land off Coventry Lane Bramcote

108ha 1 Unknown, Site Allocations Issues and Options document advises complex site with multiple ownership issues

No No None Good Green Belt land. Availability uncertain. Local Plan Review 2003 Inspector concluded the development of the site would extend into the open countryside which would be a major intrusion into pleasantly rolling landscape. Development would be poorly related to the existing urban form and would involve the loss of a substantial amount of Best and Most Versatile agricultural land. - Dismiss

14 Chetwynd Barracks, Chetwynd Road, Chilwell

75.8ha 1 No Yes Yes In theory, however in practise there is no immediate prospect of a release of land by the MoD .

Good in principle

Site unavailable. Incomparable in size to application site.- Dismiss

15 North of Gilt Hill, Kimberley

113.9ha 1 Yes No No No Poor Green Belt greenfield site. Incomparable in size to application site.- Dismiss

16 Bennerley Disposal Point and land between A610 and Gin Close Way, Awsworth

63.7ha 1 Yes No Partly Partly Poor Green Belt greenfield site. - Dismiss

17 East of motorway/north of Long Lane, Watnall

91.4ha 1 Yes No Partly Partially Poor Green Belt site, incomparable in size to application site – dismiss.

18 South west of motorway, north east of Mina Road, Watnall

112.9ha 1 Yes No No No Poor Green Belt, greenfield site, incomparable in size to application site – dismiss.

19 Shortwood Farm, Trowell

172ha 1 Yes No No No Poor Green Belt, greenfield site, incomparable in size to application site – dismiss.

20 Robbinetts, Awsworth

109.3ha 1 Yes No No No Poor Green Belt, greenfield site, incomparable in size to application site – dismiss.

21

6.5 As demonstrated by Table 1 - Assessment Sites, there are no suitable alternative

locations for the proposed development on land of a lower flood risk. In addition,

when considering alternative locations for development it is also necessary to

consider whether there are exceptional and sustainable circumstances to support

development on the Application Site.

6.6 The mix of uses proposed by the planning application will assist with scheme viability.

The proposed development will result in the retention of existing employment

buildings and the creation of new employment uses which will encourage job creation

and job retention in the area. Broxtowe Borough Council is considering options for

accommodating the strategic housing requirement and it is acknowledged that this

could result in development within the Green Belt. The proposals on the Application

Site include c200 residential units on a brownfield site which will be sequentially

preferably to land within the Green Belt. This is a significant material consideration in

the determination of the planning application.

22

7.0 CONCLUSIONS

7.1 This Flood Risk Sequential Assessment report has been prepared to accompany a

planning application proposing a mixed use redevelopment of land at Beeston

Business Park. The planning application site is a predominantly previously

developed site that extends to some 19.6 hectares (48.6 acres).The planning

application has been submitted as a ‘hybrid’ planning application. Outline planning

permission is sought for the residential element and full planning permission is

sought for the commercial element..

7.2 The Council’s Issues and Options Land Allocations consultation document, SHLAA

and the Boots and Severn Trent sequential test have been used to identify potential

alternative locations for development. This approach has been agreed with Council

Officers. The identified alternative sties have been assessed against the site

search criteria which is described in Chapter 5 of this Report.

7.3 Twenty potential alternative locations were identified for further assessment. All

twenty sites were found to be less sequentially preferable locations for development

compared to the application site. This is due to a variety of reasons, ranging from

the sites being in the same category of flood risk, their lack of availability and Green

Belt status. In summary, the land at the Beeston Business Park is considered to be

the most sequentially preferable location for the proposed development available.