North West Redditch Master PlanNorth West Redditch Master Plan Supplementary Planning Document: Consultation Draft November –December 2006 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 Study Team, Study

North West Redditch Master Plan

Draft for Public Consultation15 December 06 - 26 January 07

SupplementaryPlanning

Document

1206 ref: 0157

This and other Local Development Framework documents can be madeavailable in large copy print, audio cassette, Braille or languages other thanEnglish. If you require the document in one of these formats please contact:

Suzanne Bennett, Communications Manager, Redditch Borough Council, Town Hall, Walter Stranz Square, Redditch, Worcestershire B98 8AHEmail: [email protected]

North West Redditch Master Plan Supplementary Planning Document: Consultation Draft November – December 2006 1

CONTENTS LIST PAGE

Executive Summary 1

1. Introduction 8Purpose 8Report Structure

2. Description of Study Area 11

3. Planning Policy Context 13The Development PlanNational Planning Guidance13Regional Planning Guidance 14Worcestershire County Structure Plan, 1996 to 2011 15Redditch Local Plan No.3 17Development Requirements within Study Area 20

4. Development Constraints 22Land to the West of Redditch/Birmingham Railway Line (Persimmon) 23Land between the Railway Line and the A441 (Gallagher Site) 25Abbey Stadium and Adjoining Lands 27General Conclusions Relating to Constraints 31

5. Preparation and Evaluation of Options 32

6. Recommended Development Framework 36The Master Plan for site A (Brockhill ADR Land) 36Master Plan for site B (Abbey Stadium Site and Adjoining Lands) 39

Appendix A - Plan Showing the Extent of the Master Plan Study Area 45

Appendix B - Plan Showing Aerial View of the Master Plan Study Area 47

Appendix C – Likely route of the Bordesley Bypass 49Appendix D* - Transportation Issues Report

Appendix E* - Landscape and Visual Assessment Report

Appendix F - Master Plan Drawings for Brockhill ADR andAbbey Stadium Site and Adjoining Lands

* Because of their size, Appendices D and E are only available to view separately to the NorthWest Master Plan Draft Supplement Planning Document. (For copies please contact theDevelopment Plans Team on 01527 64252 or visit the Borough Council’s website atwww.redditch.whub.org.uk).


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.0 Study Team, Study Area and Purpose of Study

1.01 A project team, consisting of White Young Green Consulting Limited, CooperPartnership, Cresswell Associates and John Samuels Archaeology were instructed byRedditch Borough Council to prepare a development framework/Master Plan to guidefuture potential development within a study area which encompasses the following landlocated in North West Redditch:-

Brockhill Area of Development Restraint (ADR) - approximately 36 hectares of landdissected by the Redditch to Birmingham railway line.

Abbey Stadium - approximately 14 hectares of land consisting of the Abbey Stadiumfacilities and adjoining lands.

1.02 The purpose of the study was to prepare a Master Plan for the above area which wouldprovide a development framework and a set of development principles andrequirements to enable the Borough Council to meet strategic requirements foremployment land provision within Redditch up to 2011, in accordance with the provisionof Local Plan No. 3. In addition, the Master Plan was intended to provide a frameworkfor meeting identified sports and leisure requirements for the Borough on the AbbeyStadium site and adjoining lands, in accordance with needs identified in the CommunityStrategy for Redditch (2003).

1.03 The Master Plan area may be able to accommodate further development, to meetneeds identified beyond the period of Local Plan No. 3 and a further aim of the studywas to identify land to be retained as an ADR in Local Plan No. 3, so that the need forits release can be considered as part of any future review of that Plan.

1.04 During the course of the preparation of the Master Plan, consultations were held withlandowner developer interests within the study area. The developer interests providedinformation relating to physical constraints resulting from their own site investigations.That information has been a subject of critical examination as part of the preparation ofthis report.

1.06 Originally it was intended that the North West Master Plan would be a BackgroundDocument for Local Plan No. 3. However, the Master Plan is referred to in certain LocalPlan No. 3 policies and reasoned justification and expands upon those policies. It wastherefore decided that the NWMP should be adopted as a Supplementary PlanningDocument.


2.0 Land Use Requirements

2.01 To set the context for the assessment of constraints and opportunities for newdevelopment within the Master Plan area, a thorough examination of potentially relevantDevelopment Plan and national planning guidance was carried out.

2.02 The West Midlands Regional Spatial Strategy (2004) requires that Redditch provide64.3 hectares of employment land (or as the Inspector to the Local Plan No. 3 PublicLocal Inquiry stated, 65 hectares, which was the figure required by the WorcestershireStructure Plan) for the period up to 2011. The RSS allows, in principle, the provision ofmajor purpose built sports and leisure facilities in towns such as Redditch.

2.04 Employment land was required to be allocated in Local Plan No. 3. Also, there is adeficiency in the provision of various sports, recreation and leisure facilities in theBorough (as stated in the Borough Council’s Open Space Needs Assessment, June2005) which should be met over the Local Plan period. After due consideration of all theother options to accommodate the employment land required within the Borough, theCouncil decided that the most appropriate location to meet the majority of theoutstanding requirement is the Brockhill ADR land.

2.05 As a key part of the strategy of the Council for meeting the outstanding requirements forleisure and recreation needs over the Local Plan period, the Council identified theAbbey Stadium site as a potential location for major sporting, leisure and entertainmentfacilities, which could accommodate both publicly and privately operated facilities withthe development of the public facilities being cross-subsidised by the commercialelements of the proposal.

2.06 The intention of the Master Plan is to identify the most appropriate locations toaccommodate the type and scale of development required and to investigate andprescribe the parameters under which such development can take place, taking intoaccount the constraints imposed by planning policy and physical constraints todevelopment. The Master Plan sets out the development requirements which futureapplicants will be expected to provide in order to render any proposed developmentacceptable within the Master Plan area.


3.0 Key Constraints

3.01 There are several land ownerships within the Master Plan area, with each of theownership parcels possessing specific constraints and opportunities for development.The Master Plan assessed the constraints on the three main land ownerships, thesebeing Persimmon (Brockhill ADR land west of the Birmingham to Redditch railway line),JJ Gallagher (Brockhill ADR land between the A441 and the Birmingham to Redditchrailway line) and Redditch Borough Council (Abbey Stadium site and adjoining lands,although part of the land assessed also includes land under the ownership ofWorcestershire County Council).

3.02 The constraints assessed in relation to each of the ownership land parcels include thefollowing:-

Local topography

Landscaping features

Visual amenity

Ecology

Archaeology

Ground conditions

Services and infrastructure provision

Transportation

Information provided by landowners/developers in respect of each site was consideredand reviewed by the consultant’s team.

3.03 Of the three sites, the Abbey Stadium area exhibits the widest range of significantconstraints. In particular, the Abbey Stadium site is considered to be relativelyconstrained in respect of potential risk of flooding, surface water drainage, landscapesensitivity, ecological sensitivity (River Arrow special wildlife site) andarchaeology/cultural heritage.

3.04 The lands to the west of the Redditch to Birmingham railway line are constrained interms of the absence of suitable foul and surface water drainage and relativeinaccessibility by non-car modes. The key constraint affecting the land parcel betweenthe A441 and the Redditch to Birmingham railway is the visual sensitivity of the site,given its gateway location on the northern edge of the town.

3.05 An important constraint affecting the Master Plan area generally is the capacity of thelocal network to carry additional traffic generated by major new development in thislocation. Transport Assessments carried out in connection with the preparation of the


Master Plan, proposed development on the Abbey Stadium site and the planningapplication for the Bordesley Bypass all indicate that additional road infrastructure willbe required to facilitate development on the Master Plan area. Particularly sensitive inthis respect is the fact that the A441 through Bordesley is already operating close to itscapacity and at certain times of the day, the signal junction at the A441/Dagnell EndRoad, is heavily congested. Whilst the development of discreet parts of the MasterPlan area may not, by themselves, necessitate the construction of a Bordesley Bypass,the development of the Master Plan area as a whole, together with other newdevelopment elsewhere in Redditch, will generate a significant amount of new traffic onto the A441. Whilst regard will be had to any traffic assessments submitted inconnection with individual planning applications, the Council will need to assess thecumulative impact of new developments and, where appropriate, seek contributionsfrom developers towards the provision of a Bordesley Bypass in accordance with policyC(T).11 of Local Plan No.3. Depending on the scale and nature of development comingforward in the Master Plan area, or indeed elsewhere in Redditch, there may be arequirement that the bypass be provided before permitted development is brought intouse or that any new development is phased.

4.0 Recommended Development Framework

4.01 After considering a number of options for accommodating the required levels ofemployment development in light of the identified constraints, it was concluded that 6.5hectares of general employment land be allocated on the Persimmon land holding, withthe land to be allocated in a linear fashion alongside the southern/south westernboundary of that land holding, adjacent to the Enfield Industrial Estate.

4.02 That allocation will be served by two new vehicular access routes: one via the EnfieldIndustrial Estate, linking to Windsor Road; the other to be formed through linking to theexisting roundabout junction of Salters Lane/Brockhill Lane/Hewell Road/B4184.

4.03 Developers will also be expected to provide significant landscape provision tostrengthen and enhance existing natural vegetation and to provide natural screening ofnew development where appropriate. A design and access statement will need to besubmitted with any planning application to explain the design principles and conceptsthat have informed the development and how access issues have been dealt with.

4.04 In respect of the Abbey Stadium site and adjoining lands, the following land useprinciples are proposed:

(i) The central portion of the site (consisting of the existing Abbey Stadium site) toaccommodate Assembly & Leisure uses.

(ii) The predominant component of any mixed use scheme on the central site shallbe for activities falling within use class D2 indoor and outdoor sporting andrecreational facilities. Ancillary land uses falling within use classes retail (A1)and food and drink (A3/A4 and A5) will be acceptable subject to compliancewith criteria in policy R.7 of Local Plan No. 3.


(iii) The areas of land to the north of the River Arrow and south of the listedbuildings at Meadow Farm Public House and on the tear drop area south of theexisting Abbey Stadium site to accommodate development which should becomplementary to the main function of the mixed use development of theAbbey Stadium site. Appropriate land uses to include hotels (C1), food anddrink (A3/A4 and A5) and training or other facilities (D1 or C2) subject tocompliance with criteria in policy R.7 of Local Plan No. 3.

(iv) The creation and subsequent protection and enhancement of an ecologicalcorridor encompassing the River Arrow and its immediate environment.

4.05 Development at the Abbey Stadium site should not prejudice the potential of land to thewest of the A441 to accommodate future development as part of a comprehensive andintegrated land use strategy for the North West Master Plan area. Similarly, thedevelopment should not prejudice the future provision of the preferred route for theBordesley Bypass.

4.06 In addition, development at the Abbey Stadium site and adjoining lands will be requiredto make appropriate contributions to secure accessibility improvements to/from the siteby a range of means of transport other than the private car. This involves contributionstowards the provision of footpaths and cycleways and enhancement to local busservices linking to the town centre.

4.07 The design of new development on the Abbey Stadium site is intended to be of thehighest quality. A design and access statement will need to be submitted with anyplanning application to explain the design principles and concepts that have informedthe development and how access issues have been dealt with.

4.08 In view of the parkland setting of the Abbey Stadium site and its gateway location at thenorthern end of the town, it is important that new development within that part of theMaster Plan area is appropriately screened through retention of existing landscapingand provision of new landscaping, where necessary. In addition, the setting of the listedbuildings at Meadow Farm public house complex will need to be preserved or enhancedand the visual importance of the setting for the crematorium, together with thesensitivity of the activities carried out at the crematorium, will need to be respected,through the retention and enhancement of landscaping within the landscape buffer stripbetween the Riverside roundabout and the Abbey Stadium site. Any developmentproposed in the “teardrop” area of land north of the Riverside Roundabout must beappropriately sited, modest in scale and heavily landscaped to ensure compliance withthe above.

5.0 Conclusion

5.01 The Master Plan demonstrates that there is scope to accommodate a significant scaleof development, for the mix of uses required by Local Plan No. 3, within the study area,subject to compliance with a range of development requirements which are intended toensure that the various physical and planning policy constraints operating within the


study area are recognised and overcome. The Master Plan, in combination with thepolicies of Local Plan No. 3, provide the basis for consideration of planning applicationscoming forward within the study area, to meet the identified land use requirements setout in Local Plan No. 3.


The North West Redditch Master Plan - Main Report


1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.01 A project team, consisting of White Young Green Consulting Limited and CooperPartnership, were instructed by Redditch Borough Council to prepare a developmentframework/Master Plan to guide future potential development within a study area whichencompasses the following land located in north-west Redditch:

Brockhill Area of Development Restraint (ADR) - approximately 36 hectares of landdissected by the Redditch to Birmingham railway line.

Abbey Stadium - approximately 14 hectares of land consisting of the Abbey Stadiumfacilities and adjoining lands.

1.02 The whole of the study area is shown on the plan at Appendix A.

1.03 Since the work of the Study Team was carried out, there have been several significantevents which impact upon the Study area and which have implications for its futuredevelopment and the preparation of the Master Plan. These include:

Approval of the Borough of Redditch Local Plan No.3 on 31 May 2006.

The Local Plan Inspector’s acknowledgement that the North West Master Planwould be adopted as a Supplementary Planning Document.

The Secretary of State’s decision to refuse planning permission in May 2006 for amixed use development on the Abbey Stadium site.

The granting of planning permission for a Bordesley Bypass by the WorcestershireCounty Council on 23 March 2006.

1.04 This Report therefore takes into account the work carried out by the Study Teamincluding the Transportation Issues Report and the Landscape and Visual AssessmentReport, but where appropriate it also seeks to update it in the light of the above eventsand more recent national planning legislation and guidance.

Purpose

1.05 The requirement for a Master Plan for the above area arises from the followingcircumstances:

i) In order to meet the strategic requirements for employment land provision withinRedditch in the period up to 2011 additional greenfield land needed to bereleased. The Brockhill Area of Development Restraint (ADR) together with otherland designated as ADR elsewhere in Redditch was deliberately safeguarded inLocal Plan No. 2 in order to meet possible post 2001 development requirementsfor the town.

ii) The Local Planning Authority concluded that the Brockhill ADR as a sustainablelocation was suitable, in principle, to accommodate the bulk of the residualrequirements for employment development in the Borough that could be met


within the built up area of Redditch.

iii) The Council identified shortfalls in the quality and range of sports and leisurefacilities available within Redditch to meet the future needs of the Borough’sresidents. In Local Plan No. 2 the Abbey Stadium site was considered suitable, inprinciple, to accommodate sports, community facilities and open space uses.Policy R7 of Local Plan No. 3 allocates the Abbey Stadium site and adjoininglands for a major mixed use development to include assembly and leisure uses(D2); hotels (C1); ancillary retail and food and drink facilities (A1 and A3/4/5) andtraining and other facilities falling under Class D1 or C2. Any proposals mustaccord with certain specified criteria set out in the policy.

iv) The Master Plan area is divided physically by the A441 Birmingham Road.Development on either side of that main road is likely to have ramifications on thetype and scale of development which can take place on the other side, in respectof considerations such as effects on local highway network, visual and residentialamenity, community facilities, the natural environment, hydrology, drainage andother service infrastructure.

v) The study area lands are in mixed ownership, giving rise to potential differencesin the aspirations of landowners regarding the development potential of theirlands.

vi) In the longer term, the ADR lands may have potential to accommodate furtherdevelopment in order to meet identified strategic needs in the post 2011 period. Itis not the purpose of this Master Plan to seek to anticipate the requirement forany specific forms of development beyond Local Plan No.3. However, it isimportant that the Master Plan identifies general areas within the Brockhill ADRwhere future development could be accommodated in the light of constraintsidentified, which can then be safeguarded for future detailed review when post2011 land requirements are being considered.

vii) Therefore, there is a requirement to comprehensively and objectively review thestudy area in the context of the development constraints (both physical and thosearising from relevant planning policy), in order to identify the appropriate scale,type and mix of development that can be accommodated.

1.06 Proposals for the study area were the subject of consultation during the preparation ofLocal Plan No. 3. As a result of those consultations, various changes were made to theMaster Plan. Consultations were also held with landowners and developers withinterests in the study area. The developer interests have provided information relatingto physical constraints resulting from their site investigations and have identified theirpreferred development options. That information has been the subject of criticalexamination as part of the preparation of this report.

1.07 Following appropriate public scrutiny and consultation through the various stages of theLocal Plan and further consultation processes necessary for adoption, the North WestMaster Plan will have the status of a Supplementary Planning Document (SPD).



2.0 DESCRIPTION OF STUDY AREA

2.01 The study area is located to the north and north-west of Redditch Town Centre and lieson the northern-most fringe of the built up area of the town. The study area comprisesaround 50 ha of land divided into three parts by major transport corridors; the A441,Birmingham Road and the Redditch to Birmingham branch line. The A441 travels northfrom Redditch Town Centre through the settlement of Bordesley and links ultimately tojunction 2 of the M42, some 5km to the north of the study area.

2.02 For the purposes of this study, the area of land to the west of the A441 will be describedas the Brockhill ADR area. The area to the east of the A441 can be described as theAbbey Stadium site and adjoining lands.

2.03 The Brockhill ADR, consisting of some 36ha of land extends from the A441 almost asfar as Brockhill Lane to the west. All of the Brockhill ADR land is currently in agriculturaluse and the area also encompasses a farmhouse and agricultural buildings known asLowan’s Hill Farm. The land primarily consists of rough pasture divided into fields,which are bounded by hedgerows and a number of mature trees. Topographically, theBrockhill ADR is characterised by an undulating landscape, with significant rises inlevels roughly on a north-south axis. The land rises to a crest which runs generally in anorth-east/south-west direction. The Brockhill ADR land is dissected on a north-southaxis by the Redditch to Birmingham railway line. The topography of the land createsareas of distinctive visual character, with the area of land between the A441 and theridgeline being visually prominent from the main road network (A441). The remainder ofthe ADR lands to the south of the ridgeline closest to the existing built up area arerelatively screened from view.

2.04 The northernmost boundary of the Brockhill ADR land is bounded by Weights Lane,which serves a large farm complex as well as a small scale industrial estate. To thesouth of the Brockhill ADR land lies a substantial area of industrial development (up tothe Birmingham to Redditch railway line) and between the railway line and the A441, anarea of residential development. All of those uses are accessed via the B3184. Theindustrial area is separated from the ADR land by a narrow watercourse - The RedDitch - and a sporadic linear tree and hedge buffer strip which runs the length of thewatercourse. To the west and north-west, the Brockhill ADR is bounded by open fields,beyond which is Brockhill Lane and a substantial, relatively newly built residential area.There is a new housing area to the east of Brockhill Lane, which brings the extent of thebuilt up area closer to the westernmost boundary of the ADR land. The north-westernboundary of the ADR between the railway line and Brockhill Lane is formed by a singletrack access to Lowan’s Hill Farm which then links to Weights Farm.

2.05 The Abbey Stadium part of the study area consists of a sports complex incorporating asports centre, a running track, tennis courts, hockey and football pitches and a bowlinggreen. The Abbey Stadium complex is accommodated in a triangular site which is welldefined by site boundaries on all sides consisting of the A441 to the west, a cemeteryand crematorium to the south and south-east, and the river Arrow to the north andnorth-east.


2.06 This part of the study area also incorporates an area of farm land to the east of theA441 and to the north of the River Arrow, to a northern boundary defined by BordesleyLodge Farm. A further finger of land between the A441 and the cemetery/crematorium,stretching as far as the Riverside roundabout on the A441, is also included within thestudy area.

2.07 To the north east of the Abbey Stadium is a golf course, a country club and a highquality residential estate. To the east of the Abbey Stadium part of the study area, liesattractive landscape associated with the Arrow Valley, characterised by a mix of openfields bounded by mature woodland and hedgerows. The dense, linear woodland areaadjoining the River Arrow to the north of the Abbey Stadium forms a significant naturalfeature boundary to the northernmost part of Redditch’s built up area. However, thatnatural boundary has already been breached through the development of thesubstantial residential area adjacent to the Abbey Park Golf and Country Club.

2.08 The land within the study area to the east of the A441 is relatively flat compared to theBrockhill ADR land, due to the fact that the land is located within the fluvial valley of theRiver Arrow.

2.09 A plan showing an aerial view of the study area is attached at Appendix B. On thatplan various important physical features referred to in the above description of the studyarea are identified.


3.0 PLANNING POLICY CONTEXT FOR THE MASTER PLAN AREA

3.01 Both PPS1 and PPS12 (paragraph 1.6) set out the Government’s commitment to aplan-led system and the latter emphasises the importance of Section 38(6) of thePlanning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, which gives primacy to the DevelopmentPlan in the determination of planning applications and appeals. Section 36(6) requiresthat where regard is to be had to the Development Plan for the purpose of anydetermination to be made under the Planning Acts the determination must be made inaccordance with the plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise.

3.02 For the purposes of this study, the Development Plan consists of the West MidlandsRegional Spatial Strategy (RSS) (June 2004), the Worcestershire Structure Plan (June2001) and the Borough of Redditch Local Plan No. 3 (May 2006). The Regional SpatialStrategy reflects current Government Planning Policy set out in various Planning PolicyGuidance notes (PPG’s) and Planning Policy Statements (PPS’s). The WorcestershireStructure Plan covers the period between 1996 and 2011. The Borough of RedditchLocal Plan No. 3 covers the period between 2001 and 2011 and conforms to theprovision of the Regional Spatial Strategy and also Government Policy Guidance.

3.03 In the following paragraphs the key policies from the national and local level, ofrelevance to the study area are identified and summarised.

National Planning Guidance

3.04 National Planning Policy Guidance has been prepared to provide statements ofGovernment planning policy on specific subjects and for particular land uses.Statements of national planning policy are set out in Planning Policy Statements(PPS’s) which are slowly replacing Planning Policy Guidance notes (PPG’s). They forma material consideration in the determination of planning applications and appeals andinfluence the preparation of RSS and Local Plans.

3.05 Relevant Government policy is set out in Planning Policy Guidance Notes (PPG’s)including PPG 2 (Green Belts), PPG 4 (Industrial, Commercial Development and SmallFirms), PPG 13 (Transport), PPG 16 (Archaeology and Planning), PPG 17 (Planning forOpen Space Sport and Recreation), PPG24 (Planning and Noise) and PPG 25(Development and Flood Risk).

3.06 Relevant Planning Policy Statements (PPS’s) include PPS1 (Creating SustainableCommunities), PPS7 (Sustainable Development in Rural Areas), PPS9 (Biodiversityand Geological Conservation) PPS12 (Local Development Frameworks), PPS22(Renewable Energy), PPS23 (Planning and Pollution Control) and the Good PracticeGuide to Tourism (which replaces PPG 21).

3.07 The Department for Communities and Local Government issued Circular 01/2006Guidance on Changes to the Development Control System which is also of relevancewhen submitting any development proposals. Appropriate outline and full planningapplications for development on the North West Master Plan area must be accompanied


by design and access statements which should explain the design principles andconcepts that have informed the development and how the access issues have beendealt with. The level of detail of the statement should be proportionate with the scale andcomplexity of the proposal.

3.08 Within national guidance, there is a clear emphasis upon achieving sustainablecommunities which will stand the test of time, whilst at the same time protecting andenhancing the natural environment and optimising resource and energy use.

Regional Planning Guidance

3.09 Regional Planning Guidance for the West Midlands is contained in RPG11 (The WestMidlands Regional Spatial Strategy). This was adopted in June 2004.

3.10 The Regional Spatial Strategy points out that its ultimate aim is a Region made up of adynamic network of places, all important in their own right and with distinctcharacteristics, but with reinforcing economic, cultural and social functions. In terms ofRedditch, this entails the Borough building upon its locational strength, environmentalquality, regeneration opportunities and the linkages between them and with the localhinterland.

3.11 Within the spatial strategy, Redditch is identified as a “local regeneration area outside theregeneration zones” and a “strategic centre”. Under Policy UR2 local regenerationpolicies and programmes are encouraged to be brought forward to improve prospects inthe area.

3.12 Set out below are current policies in the RSS that influence the North West Master Planand its development, separated under the issue headings that may have an impact onthe NWMP area.

Transport and Accessibility

3.13 Transport and accessibility are key areas of importance with regard to the NWMP. PolicyT1 of the RSS sets out the overarching framework of transport influence over thedevelopment area.

Housing

3.14 Policy CF2 sets out that housing provision outside the MUA’s will be reduced to levelswhere it is largely meeting local needs i.e. Redditch is not expected to cope with de-centralisation numbers. “Other large settlements” such as Redditch should not beseeking to accommodate migration from the MUA’s. The sub-regional foci are intended toaccommodate longer term strategic housing development, commensurate with their roleas sub-regional service centres, with regards to Worcestershire County, Worcester City isidentified as the Sub-regional foci for development. However, it should be noted that theRSS is the subject of review with options for housing growth post 2011 due to be thesubject of consultation in January 2007.


Economic Growth

3.15 Under Policy PA1 economic growth should be focused on the MUA’s. Where growthopportunities are provided outside the MUA’s, emphasis should be given to locatingdevelopment where (inter alia) it can serve the needs of the local regeneration areas andwhere it can help create more sustainable communities by providing a better balancebetween housing and employment and limiting the need for commuting.

Employment

3.16 Policy PA6 states that Local Authorities are required to provide and maintain a rangeand choice of readily available employment sites to meet the needs of the regionaleconomy.

Environment

3.17 Policy QE1 emphasises the importance of environmental improvements as thisunderpins other RSS objectives such as improving quality of life, and supports otherwider economic and social objectives. It also emphasises the importance of developersadopting high standards for sustainable natural resource use and management. PolicyQE3 recognises the need to provide a high quality built environment for all. Theprovisions of Policy QE7 mean that development is required to protect, manage andenhance biodiversity and nature conservation resources. Linked to this is Policy QE9which states that development should protect or improve water quality and managedemand.

3.18 Policies EN1 and EN2 incorporate the need for Local Authorities to encourage proposalsthat use renewable energy resources and the importance of energy conservation. Anyfuture development should encourage the use of renewable energy sources and usetechnologies most appropriate to the site and development.

Tourism and Culture

3.19 Policy PA10 highlights the importance of encouraging the improvement and the creationof tourist facilities as appropriate.

Worcestershire County Structure Plan, 1996 to 2011

3.20 The Worcestershire County Structure Plan is saved up to 2009. It aims to establish astrategic policy framework for development and planning over the entire county. Thissection details policies in the Structure Plan that may influence or relate to the NorthWest Master Plan area. Many of the policies outlined here are supported by Policy IMP.1Implementation of Development, which states that the design and provisions of newdevelopment should help to achieve the sustainability objectives of the Structure Plan.

Sustainable Development


3.21 Policy D.21 states that the allocation of land for economic development purposes shouldonly be made where there is a reasonable expectation of that land coming forward fordevelopment and where it is or can be served by public transport. Additional employmentallocations will only be allocated if the development meets a range of criteria set out inPolicy D.22. In accordance with Policy D.25 certain sites may be restricted to thedevelopment of specific uses within Class B to ensure that a range of opportunities areencouraged.

3.22 A sequential approach is required to be adopted for the preferred location of officedevelopment falling within Classes A2 and B1 if it is found to be required in the North-West area (Policy D.26).

3.23 Policy D.41 concerns Areas of Development Restraint and states that ADR’s arerequired to be reviewed against the sustainability criteria Policy SD.4 and Policy SD.5,as part of the review of the Local Plan.

3.24 In terms of sustainable development Policy SD.2, Policy SD.4 and Policy SD.5 all applyto the North West area. These policies imply that considerable care for the environmentis needed to ensure there are no detrimental impacts on the environment resulting fromdevelopment. Development will only be permitted if is considers the need to minimise theneed to travel and work towards achieving a balanced community through housing,employment, community and social facilities.

3.25 It is important that new development fulfils renewable energy needs. The Structure Planadvises that a development that provides a renewable energy feature will be supported inaccordance with Policy EN.1.

Conservation

3.26 Policy CTC.1 outlines that development may only occur if it is informed by and inkeeping with the landscape character. Policy CTC.8 also applies to the developmentarea, as flood risk and surface water drainage is an important issue that will requirereconciliation before development begins. Archaeological sites are of significantimportance in and around the development site, and the relative importance of the siteswill need to be accounted for in accordance with Policy CTC.17.

Transport

3.27 The Structure Plan advocates that development should be located within or adjacent tourban areas and should seek to locate development where it would minimise the need fortravel and provide for access by different modes. Local Planning Authorities should haveto have regard to the appropriate mobility profile of the development and accessibilityprofile of the proposed location in accordance with Policy T.1.

3.28 Policy T.2 states developers will be expected to contribute towards funding integratedtransport facilities and/or to help secure improvements in public transport and


infrastructure in order to maximise access within and to developments by foot, cycle andpublic transport. Policy T.12 safeguards the line of the Bordesley Bypass.

Employment

3.29 65 Hectares of employment land was required to be provided in Redditch Borough foremployment purposes between 1996 and 2011 in accordance with Policy D.19 of theStructure Plan. (It should be noted that Local Plan conforms to the RSS rather that theStructure Plan and it was recommended by the Inspector to the Local Plan that theamount of employment land to be allocated should be calculated by using the StructurePlan formula of 1ha of employment land for every 70 dwellings and applying that to theRSS housing requirement of 4504 dwellings. The result was so close to the 65ha soughtby Structure Plan D19 for Redditch up to 2011 that it was considered reasonable tocontinue using that figure). Part of the NWMP land is reserved for 6.6 ha of employmentusage. The defined usage of this land is mixed use developments; this portfolio is arequirement of Policy D.20.

Recreation

3.30 Proposals to develop facilities for recreation and sport to serve the needs of local peopleand visitors will be encouraged and considered against a set of criteria in Policy RST.1.Proposals for major recreational development should not be located in environmentallysensitive areas or cause unacceptable environmental or social impacts in accordancewith Policy RST.2.

3.31 Regional and sub-regional purpose-built sports and formal recreation facilities will only bepermitted where access by public transport can be maximised and in accordance withPolicy SD.6, Policy SD.7 and Policy SD.8. An assessment against strict environmentalcriteria covering noise, lighting and hours of operation will be undertaken relating to majorsports field developments in accordance with Policy RST.11.

3.32 Criteria relating to the impact of development, accessibility and the scale of developmentand ancillary features should be used to assess proposals for tourism relateddevelopment. Development of the tourism industry should be encouraged in accordancewith Policy RST.14. Tourist accommodation, including new hotels and conferencefacilities is encouraged by Policy RST.16 subject to compliance with Policy RST.14.

The Borough of Redditch Local Plan No. 3

3.33 The aim of Local Plan No. 3 is to implement the Redditch Community Strategy and applynational, regional and county level planning policy to Redditch. The Local Plan aims toprotect the Borough’s environment, promote sustainable development and providesufficient land for development, securing appropriate facilities. The Local Plan isunderpinned by sustainability.

3.34 The Local Plan designates certain areas within Redditch as ‘Areas of DevelopmentRestraint’ (ADR) through Policy B(RA).3. An area of Brockhill is designated as an ADR.


It is in a location that would enable balanced communities to be achieved and isconsidered to be sustainable. ADR’s are safeguarded to meet possible longer termdevelopment requirements beyond 2011.

Environment

3.35 Under Policy B(BE).2 development proposals that affect local archaeological sites orstructures will be required to take account of their importance.

3.36 Policy B(BE).13 seeks to achieve good design in all development. Proposals will beassessed in accordance with a set of criteria. The criteria relate to a variety ofarchitectural, accessibility, amenity, design, crime reduction, wildlife, legibility andwaste/recycling considerations. Policy B(BE).19 outlines the importance of greenarchitecture, the use of sustainable materials, efficiency of the building and sustainabledrainage. A key environmental policy in terms of natural environment is Policy B(NE).1‘Overarching Policy of Intent’, which seeks to enhance and conserve the naturalenvironment and landscape quality of the Borough.

3.37 Under Policy CS.1 the energy implications of developments will be assessed with theaim of minimising energy consumption. By increasing energy efficiency, pressure onnatural resources is reduced and greenhouse gases minimised. Policy CS.4 requiresnew developments to be accessed by a range of methods and to be in locations thatreduce reliance on the private car. Policy CS.5 states that proposals should help sustainand improve the balance of housing, employment, community and social facilities andshould maximise the use of existing infrastructure.

3.38 Policy CS.6 expects that in appropriate circumstances developers are required to makeprovision for related environmental works, infrastructure and community facilities andservices. Under Policy CS.8 proposals must demonstrate they are informed by andsympathetic to landscape character in the area in which the proposals are made. ALandscape and Visual Assessment of the Master Plan Area is attached as Appendix Eof this SPD.

3.39 Policy B(BE).28 states that in considering applications for development, developers mustprovide appropriately sized and designed green waste deposit facilities, provideappropriate recycling facilities and provide public litter collection receptacles (litter bins)and dog waste receptacles where appropriate.

3.40 Policy S.1 states that all developments must incorporate appropriate measures in theirdesign, layout, siting and landscaping to minimise the risk of crime and maximisesecurity. The Borough Council is also producing a Supplementary Planning Documententitled “Designing for Community Safety” which will be a material consideration inconjunction with Policy S.1.

Employment


3.41 Employment at North West Redditch is covered by Policy E(EMP).6. Land at Brockhill(6.6 ha) is designated for employment purposes (use classes B1, B2 and B8). The aim ofthis policy is to ensure mixed use development occurs in a comprehensive and integratedmanner. Development proposals on this employment land should comply with theprovisions set out in Policy E(EMP).6, for example legal agreements to provide footpathand cycleway or structural landscaping. The policy holds 4 main provisions that will needto be accounted for when putting forward development proposals on the land.

Access

3.42 Access is a key aspect in relation to the NMWP area; all developments shouldincorporate safe and convenient access arrangements in their design and facilitate multi-modal access in accordance with Policy C(T).1.

Culture and Recreation

3.43 The site incorporating the Abbey stadium is designated as major mixed use developmentto include a number of leisure and recreational developments. Policy R.7 is a targetedpolicy at the development in North West Redditch including the Abbey Stadium. Thepolicy states that the mixed use development must include:-

Assembly and leisure (D2).

Hotels (C1).

Ancillary Retail and food and drink facilities (A1 and A3/4/5).

Training and other facilities falling under Class D1 or C2.

3.44 Policy R.7 also stipulates the criteria that development on this site must accord with.Among other things, these require the predominant component of any mixed usedevelopment to be indoor and outdoor sporting and recreational facilities. Where anydistinct element of the mixed use development would serve a catchment wider than theBorough, it should be complementary to existing provision within that wider area. Accessmust not undermine development on land west of the A441. For the most part, towncentre uses need to comply with policy E(TCR).4 During any disruption to the AbbeyStadium, facilities must be located in an accessible location elsewhere in the Borough.The development must be accessible through a choice of modes of transport. Theproposals must be of outstanding architectural quality and included sustainablemeasures. All environmental considerations must be taken into account includingecological corridors and flood risk assessment and boundary treatments and landscapingis of utmost importance. Policy R.7 outlines these criteria in full.

Development Requirements within Study Area

3.45 Local Plan No. 3 has designated part of the NWMP area as employment land to form partof the strategic employment requirement of 65 hectares for the period up to 2011 inaccordance with Policy E(EMP).1.


3.46 With regards to the assessment of recreation and leisure needs, an aim of the BoroughCouncil is to improve the range of leisure facilities within the Borough.

3.47 Various assessments of the adequacy of the Borough’s recreation, leisure and touristfacilities have been carried out since the mid 1990s, including:

“Redditch … Action Town: towards an arts and leisure strategy” a report by Knight,Kavanagh and Page prepared in June 1997.

“What Do You Want”: A community works Borough-wide survey of young people’sneeds” - a report prepared by Redditch BC in August 1998.

An Audit Commission Report on the Borough’s leisure facilities, dated 2002.

“2020 Vision” - A report prepared by Redditch Borough Council in 2002.

Tourism Strategy for Worcestershire 2002 - 2005 Prepared by WorcestershireCounty Council and the constituent district authorities.

3.48 The Borough Council’s sports and leisure strategy draws from the various researchcarried out, sets out a baseline position and considers the way forward in order to meetfuture sports and leisure needs in the Borough, taking into account both governmentpolicy aimed at encouraging greater grass roots participation in sport and physical activityand also the Council’s Corporate Plan objective to improve the health of the localcommunity.

3.49 An important component to help achieve those strategic objectives is the redevelopmentof the Abbey Stadium to create a mixed use sport and leisure based facility incorporatinga range of sports and leisure activities in state of the art accommodation. This is mostlikely to be achieved via a partnership with the private sector. The key advantages ofinvolving the private sector relate to savings to the public purse in terms both the capitalcosts of delivery and subsequent revenue costs associated with maintenance of thefacility once built. Other envisaged benefits are the potential for private sector funding forthe replacement of existing facilities at Abbey Stadium elsewhere in the Borough as wellas improving the range of sports and leisure facilities available to the local community. Itis also envisaged that the mixed use Abbey Stadium development would contribute toother corporate strategies and objectives, relating to the enhancement of opportunity forlife long learning and skills development and the enhancement of the town as a venue fortourism.

3.50 The Audit Commission report produced in 2002 involved a comprehensive and criticalreview of the adequacy of existing leisure and recreation facilities in the Borough (interms of physical condition, demand and management) and assessed the proposedstrategy of the Council to improve the quality and range of the Borough’s leisure facilities,part of which involved the proposed redevelopment of the Abbey Stadium site to create amajor integrated mixed leisure and entertainment venue, using a private sectordevelopment partner. The Audit Commission concluded that:


“131 Completion of the Abbey Stadium project will allow the Council toreinvest scarce revenue into the development of sport and communityactivities across the board thus reaching, potentially, a much wide audience.This combined with the greater use of former school buildings and groundswill produce the extra capacity the Service needs to develop. This is anambitious plan but achievable….”

3.51 There was, therefore, tacit support given to the Council’s general leisure strategy and theAbbey Stadium proposal as an integral part of that strategy.

3.52 In the light of the above, and the allocation of the Abbey Stadium site and adjoining landsfor a major mixed use development, this study accepts the principle of suchdevelopment, but seeks to investigate and prescribe the parameters under which such adevelopment can take place, taking into account the constraints imposed by planningpolicy at all levels and physical constraints to development imposed by local topography,landscape, visual amenity, ecology, archaeology, ground conditions and service andinfrastructure provision. In addition, following the decision of the Secretary of State torefuse outline planning permission in May 2006 for a specific proposal involving majormixed use development on the Abbey Stadium site, it is clear that any future proposalsmust have due regard to relevant planning policies and in particular any impact upon thevitality and viability of the town centre.


4.0 DEVELOPMENT CONSTRAINTS

4.01 In order to reach an informed view on the appropriate type, mix, scale and distribution ofproposed land uses within the study area, a thorough examination of the developmentconstraints affecting the study area was undertaken. That examination involved thefollowing specific elements of work:

i) A critical investigation of the preliminary assessments of physical developmentconstraints provided by the professional advisors to the various land owners withinthe study area. The auditing of that information was carried out by White YoungGreen Consulting (Civil and Structural Engineering, Environmental andTransportation divisions), Creswell Associates (ecological consultants) and JohnSamuels (archaeological consultants).

ii) Worcestershire County Council carried out traffic counts on the road network in thevicinity of the study area in January 2003. Using that information, White YoungGreen Transportation division devised a model to test assumptions regarding futuretraffic generation and distribution associated with a range of potential developmentoptions on the study area lands. WYG Transportation also assessed current levelsof accessibility to the study area by a range of non-car modes, including publictransport, cycling and footpath/footways. That assessment leads to requirements ofrelated infrastructure or any other appropriate transportation improvements such aspavements or cycle paths to be provided by developers in connection with planningapplications in the Master Plan area. The Transport Issues Report forms AppendixD.

iii) An appraisal of landscape character and a visual constraints analysis has beencarried out by Cooper Partnership. The landscape and visual assessment reportforms Appendix E.

4.02 In respect of i) above, the following information was provided on behalf of the variouslandowners:-

On behalf of Persimmon, RPS:

Topographical survey data.

Engineering and Services Report (by Mason Richards Engineering) - January 2002.

Current draft Master Plan.

Archaeological desk based assessment (by JSAC) - January 2002.

Summary of site investigation (October 2002).

Noise Assessment (by WSP) - October 2002.

Ecological Appraisal (by fpcr) - October 2002.

Landscape and Visual Appraisal (by fpcr) - October 2002.

On behalf of J J Gallagher, Terence O’Rourke plc:


A Landscape Appraisal (September 2002).

A Cultural heritage desk top assessment (July 2002).

A Preliminary ecological site appraisal (July 2002).

Transportation Statement (by WSP) - March 2003.

On behalf of Atlantic Beacon Ltd:

An Environmental assessment scoping report (November 2002).

Various reports relating to the need for additional leisure and tourist facilities withinRedditch (including a Borough-wide survey of young people’s needs entitled “WhatDo You Want” (August 1998), a tourist strategy for Worcestershire byWorcestershire Tourism (August 2002), a Community Strategy ConsultationWorkshop (20:20 Vision) and a report by the Audit Commission (March 2002)regarding Redditch Borough Council’s leisure facilities.

4.03 An outline planning application was submitted by Atlantic Beacon Ltd for a major mixeduse development comprising A1, A3, C1, D1 and D2 uses. Submitted with thatapplication was the following supporting information:

An Environmental Impact Assessment (prepared by Halcrow);

A planning support statement (prepared by Harris Lamb);

As Assessment of Alternative Sites (prepared by Harris Lamb);

Retail Assessment (Prepared by MWA Planning and Development Consultancy).

4.04 Whilst the application was subsequently called-in and refused by the Secretary of State,this SPD draws on relevant factual material submitted in support of that application.

4.05 A brief summary of the various constraints and opportunities associated with each landparcel within the Master Plan area is given below, under a number of subject headings,to the extent that relevant information is available at this time.

Land to the West of Redditch/Birmingham Railway Line (Persimmon)

Ground Conditions and Contamination

4.06 From the limited ground investigations carried out it would appear that there are noissues relating to unstable ground conditions or ground contamination which wouldprevent the development of this land for employment purposes.

Drainage - Surface Water and Foul

4.07 Severn Trent Water have confirmed that it would be acceptable to discharge surfacewater into the Red Ditch provided the discharge is limited to greenfield run off and anassociated storm water balancing pond is provided. The Red Ditch is occasionally proneto localised flooding and improvement may be required to reduce the risk of floodingassociated with any development on the site. Developers must agree the extent of anyworks necessary with the Environment Agency.


4.08 The foul sewer off Hewell Road is unlikely to have the capacity to accommodatesignificant new development on this part of the Master Plan area and Severn Trent haveindicated that it may be necessary to requisition any off site sewer, possibly to connectwith the existing sewer running alongside Batchley Brook at the point where the railwayline crosses Windsor Road.

Service Supplies

4.09 While there are no water supply services crossing the site there is a 250 mm diametermain located at the Salter’s Lane/Hewell Road roundabout and a three inch main is laidunder Weights Lane serving the gas transfer station at Weights Farm.

4.10 Although there are no gas supply services within the site, there is a twelve inch and sixinch cast iron low pressure mains gas supply running up Hewell Road together with a125 mm diameter medium pressure main. In addition Transco have a high pressure mainrunning on the eastern side of the railway line and a second main which runs from thegas transfer station on Weights Lane.

4.11 BT have existing services in Hewell Road, Brockhill Lane and also alongside the track upto Lowans Hill Farm.

4.12 GPU Power Engineering advised that there are two primary overhead electricity linescrossing the site, operating at 66 KV and a high voltage line operating at 11 KV. Theseservices are associated with the Redditch North substation located to the south of thesite.

Ecology and Biodiversity

4.13 The ecological appraisal carried out by fprc revealed that there is a little by way of anysignificant ecological interest within the site with the exception of badger sets, all of whichhave been taken into account in preparing the land-use options for this part of the MasterPlan area. The potential to create an improved wildlife habitat around the Red Ditch, aspart of an open space management regime, was identified.

Landscape and Visual Impact

4.14 No statutory landscape designations apply within this site, although a LandscapeProtection Area and an Area of Great Landscape Value lie to the north. The main visualconstraints are formed by the rising land at the northern end of the site, on top of which isa wooded area. The constraints relate to the visual prominence of that land and the welldefined landscape character. The lower part of this site, closest to the Red Ditch and theexisting employment on Windsor Road, is visually well enclosed and least sensitive tochange. This provides a good opportunity for development. The Red Ditch forms thesouthern boundary of this site and is a strong landscape feature, with potential forenhancement.

Highways/Access

4.15 One of the key constraints associated with the development of this land is its relativeinaccessibility to the main road network (due to a lack of road infrastructure and transport


links within the site), and poor linkage to the existing public transport facilities andcycleway/footpath network. It will therefore be necessary for new highway access links tobe created as part of any development proposals, and also for appropriate provision tobe made to ensure that the site is accessible by a choice of non-car modes. An analysisof the capacity of existing junctions on the local highway network in the vicinity of the siteshows that there is generally potential to accommodate significant levels of development.However, the A441 through Bordesley is presently operating close to its capacity with thejunction of the A441/Dagnell End Road being heavily congested at certain times of theday. This acts as a constraint to any development in this area which would result insignificant extra traffic flows through this junction.

Archaeology/Cultural Heritage

4.16 The archaeological desk top assessment of this part of the Master Plan area, carried outby John Samuels Archaeological Consultants, revealed no sites of significantarchaeological interest, although the presence of Bordesley Abbey (a Scheduled AncientMonument) and the possible presence of a deserted medieval settlement in the widerarea, were sited. The site is rated as having low-medium potential for the existence ofarchaeological remains, although some further field investigation (as part of anydevelopment) was recommended.

Land between the Railway Line and the A441 (Gallagher Site)


4.17 No information arising from any initial geotechnical or ground contamination surveyshave been made available for the purposes of this study. However, the nature of thecurrent and known historic land uses would indicate that neither ground conditions norcontamination are likely to result in any significant constraint to development potential onthis land.

Drainage

4.18 While no detailed assessment of current drainage infrastructure has been undertaken inrespect of this land, it is understood that sufficient mains drainage capacity exists in thevicinity to accommodate the likely discharge from development of the scale that can beachieved on this site.

Service Supplies

4.19 No assessment of current service supplies relating to this site has been carried out at thisstage. However, due to the juxtaposition of this site adjacent to the built up area ofRedditch, it would appear that all of the key services (water, electricity, gas andtelecoms) can be provided to enable development in this site without undue difficulty.

Ecology/Biodiversity

4.20 From the results of the preliminary assessments carried out by Terence O’Rouke Plc itwould appear that the site is of limited ecological value. Further investigations will be


required as part of any proposed development, in order to provide more details as towhether any protected species are present (such as badgers and water voles).


4.21 This site is considered to be more visually sensitive than the area to the west of therailway, since it forms part of the Arrow Valley Character Area. The land rises to a ridgebeyond the railway line and this is a prominent site in a gateway location, when viewedfrom the A441. Any future development on this site will therefore be expected to be ofhigh quality, befitting the gateway status of the site. In landscape terms it is important toavoid a perception of urban sprawl at this location and it will therefore be necessary tobreak up the massing of any future development through appropriate structural planting.

Highways/Access

4.22 Being adjacent to the A441, this site is potentially accessible to the main road network.However, no direct highway access from the site to the A441 currently exists and theoptions for achieving such a link will depend on what form of development takes place onthe Abbey Stadium site and how that will be accessed, and whether or not the Bordesleyby-pass is built.

4.23 To the north of the site is Weights Lane serving Weights Lane farm and industrialestates. Connection to that road to serve development on the Gallagher site has beenconsidered. The road is currently substandard and significant improvements would benecessary in terms of widening at the junction with the A441. Depending on the scale ofdevelopment using that road the junction may have to be signal controlled. That wouldhave adverse consequences for the operation of the Dagnell End Road/A441 signaljunction, which is already operating at full capacity.

4.24 In respect of public transport, the site is served by a number of services which operatealong the A441, with three services providing at least a half hourly frequency in eachdirection (although only one outside peak period) on weekdays. The bus servicesoperating on the A441 directly link from the Town Centre to other settlements(Bromsgrove and Birmingham) and therefore only cover a limited population catchmentwithin Redditch. There may be opportunities to improve the frequency of bus servicespassing close to this site (in conjunction with potential development at the Abbey Stadiumsite). The public transport improvements will be required for sustainable access to thearea.

4.25 Current access to this site by cycle and on foot is poor, due to the lack of dedicatedcycling facilities adjacent to the site and lack of a pedestrian footway on the northboundcarriageway of the A441 at this location. Measures to improve pedestrian and cycleprovision alongside the A441 and linking to the Town Centre/railway station, must beincorporated as part of any proposal to develop this site.


4.26 Desk-top investigations carried out by Terence O’Rourke plc have found that there are nodesignations of cultural heritage interest within the site itself, although it is identified inthe Worcestershire County Sites and Monuments Record as the location of a deserted


medieval village. The desk top study identifies the two sites scheduled for their nationalsignificance in the vicinity of the site: the Bordesley Abbey site and the medieval waterpowered needle mill at Forge Mill (to the south of the Abbey). The conclusion reached isthat the site has high potential for archaeological interest stemming from medievaloccupation of the land, with remains likely to be of county and possibly regionalsignificance. The site is likely to be part of a larger area of deserted medieval settlementrunning from the northern part of the Abbey Stadium across the railway and north toBordesley Farm Lodge.

Abbey Stadium and Adjoining Lands


4.27 No information has made available as part of this study regarding ground conditions andcontamination on the land within the study area to the east of the A441. However, theEnvironmental Statement accompanying the Abbey Stadium redevelopment scheme,indicated that no serious constraints exist on this land in relation to ground conditions andcontamination.

Drainage: Surface Water and Foul

4.28 The submitted Environmental Statement indicates that the site is currently drained by aseparate foul and surface water system and that both systems are private. The foulsewer discharges into an adopted sewer located on the site boundary. The surface watersystem serving the site collects surface water run-off collects surface water run-off anddrains by gravity to an outfall into the River Arrow.

4.29 The construction of impermeable surface as part of any development on the AbbeyStadium site is likely to result in a change of the rainfall run-off relationship within thefloodplain and changes in ground profile at site locations within the flood plain may affectriver levels. As such, new development is likely to modify the existing floodplaincharacteristics. This may have knock on effects both upstream and downstream of thesite. It will therefore be important that any drainage systems proposed to serve newdevelopment on this site be designed in such a way that they minimise any impact on theRiver Arrow and do not increase the flooding potential of the catchment. The drainagesystem must be designed with a rapid transmission capacity for road surfaces, but withprovision for attenuation and pollution control before drainage waters are discharged toground or surface water bodies.

Service Supplies

4.30 No specific information has been provided as part of this study regarding service suppliesto this site. However in the light of the proximity of the site to the built up area and thepresence of all relevant services in the vicinity of the site, there is unlikely to be anysignificant constraint to development arising from this factor, although developers will beexpected to liaise with relevant statutory undertakers to ensure that all necessaryimprovements to the supply network to satisfactorily serve the development can beachieved.


Ecology and Biodiversity

4.31 The main constraints to development on this site in respect of ecology and biodiversityrelate to the potential effects on the River Arrow Special Wildlife Site (SWS), whichpasses through the potential development area on an east-west axis. The SWS status isa non-statutory local designation and the Abbey Stadium site and adjoining lands are notthe subject of any international or national nature conservation designations. In thevicinity of the site, but not part of it, is the Dagnell End Meadow Site of Special ScientificInterest (SSSI).

4.32 As part of the Environmental Assessment a full ecological assessment was carried out,incorporating a Phase I habitat survey. That survey revealed the existence of a numberof trees and hedgerows requiring protection; a number of bird species of importance(including the kingfisher, which is protected under the Wildlife and Countryside Act) andthe presence of bats, otters and newts, although no evidence of badgers.

4.33 Any proposed development of this site should incorporate measures to protect andenhance the ecological value of the land. This will include the incorporation of anecological buffer zone either side of the River Arrow SWS, where no built developmentwill be permitted and where appropriate measures will be taken to ensure minimaldegradation of water quality and protection of vegetation and ecological habitats. Withinthe site and on the site boundaries there are hedgerows and mature trees that make animportant contribution to local visual amenity as well as acting as wildlife habitats and thedevelopment on this site should seek to retain and, where possible, enhance the naturalvegetation of most value, as part of any scheme.


4.34 The visual assessment carried out by Cooper Partnership shows that, in respect of theland to the east of the A441:

i) This area is well enclosed with views from Redditch and from the countryside to thenorth limited by existing vegetation along the Arrow Valley river corridor, also by thelandform and vegetation within the crematorium;

ii) Local views are limited by vegetation and earth mounding along its boundary withinthe A441 and by vegetation along the Arrow Valley river corridor;

iii) Views into the crematorium are well filtered by existing boundary vegetation;

iv) The site is often seen in the context of the crematorium; and

v) From most of the mid to distant viewpoints the poplars along the western boundaryof the site are the only discernable feature of the site.

4.35 The most sensitive visual receptors are the listed buildings at Bordesley LodgeFarmhouse, the Granary and water pump (all Grade II) which are located in a group to anorth of the River Arrow and the crematorium. Any development must pay particularregard to the sensitive nature of the crematorium and adjacent cemetery includingretention and where necessary reinforcement of vegetation in order to strengthen thescreening capacity of existing planting. Any proposed development and/or landscape


treatment within the setting of the listed building will need careful attention.

4.36 New development should respect the scale and enclosed nature of the landscape in thisarea. At present, the content of the site is well screened in mid to long distance views byvegetation and landform in the immediate vicinity of the site. A significant loss ofvegetation within the Arrow Valley, or new development at an inappropriate scale, couldadversely affect the character of the river valley.

Highways/Access

4.37 While the site is adjacent to the A441 and thus offers the potential for accessibility by car,the current constraints operating on the local road network associated with the high levelof traffic flows through Bordesley village and the lack of operational capacity at theDagnell End Road/A441 junction, act to limit the type and scale of development whichcan be accommodated on this site, particularly if that development would generatesignificantly higher levels of traffic at this location. The Transport Issues Report atAppendix D indicates that (on the basis of traffic counts) the A441 through Bordesley iscurrently carrying the level of traffic which would justify the provision of a new road todual 7.3m standard. However, evidence regarding traffic generation and road capacityproduced at the Abbey Stadium called-in Inquiry led the Inspector to conclude that trafficgenerated by the Abbey Stadium proposal would not itself necessitate construction of thebypass by 2008 but, added to other increases from proposed development, it bringsnearer the time by which the bypass would be needed.

4.38 The provision of a Bordesley bypass is proposed in the Worcestershire County StructurePlan, the Bromsgrove District Local Plan 2004 and the Borough of Redditch Local PlanNo. 3. Also, planning permission was granted for the Bordesley bypass in March 2006.However, the County Council consider that the bypass is not a scheme of regionalsignificance and Worcestershire’s Local Transport Plan 2 (2006/2011) clearly linksprovision of the bypass with the redevelopment of the Abbey Stadium site.

4.39 Site access to serve any major new development on the Abbey Stadium site should bedesigned in such a way that it does not undermine the potential to accommodatedevelopment on lands to the west of the A441(Gallagher lands) or prejudice theconstruction of the Bordesley Bypass. The location and requirement for any secondaryaccess to serve development to the east of the A441 (for example on the land to thenorth of the River Arrow) will be determined by the Highway Authority with regard to thelikely alignment of the Bordesley bypass.

4.40 Current levels of accessibility by bus to the Abbey Stadium site are similar to thosepertaining at the Gallagher site. However, the current level of service does not providethe frequency or coverage of the population catchment that would be required to serve amajor mixed use development and developers will be required to provide, as part of anysuch proposals, appropriate enhancement of public transport provision to enable a highlevel of access for residents within the built up area of Redditch and also frequentconnections between the site and the Town Centre. Additionally, measures to enablebuses to take on/off load passengers within the development site, if necessary bydiverting current routes, must be explored with bus operators.


4.41 Levels of access to the site by bicycle are currently poor due to the lack of any dedicatedcycle routes at this location. However, most of the site is within 1,500m of the TownCentre and as such there is significant potential to create improved cycle links to thecentre as a result of development. In addition, the Transport Issues Report at AppendixD recommends that further cycle link improvements are necessary as part of anydevelopment to ensure maximum accessibility by non-car modes, including links toexisting local cycleway networks and connection to the National Cycleway NetworkRoute 5, which runs approximately 700m from the site.

4.42 The pedestrian network in this area is primarily alongside the carriageway of roads andthere is no strategic pedestrian route network linking the site to the Town Centre andother major nodes. The establishment of a safe and signed pedestrian network as part ofany development of the Abbey Stadium and other parts of the Master Plan area will needto be provided, and developers will be expected to contribute to the implementation ofsuch a network.


4.43 There are several important constraints to development relating to archaeology andcultural heritage at this site, these being:

i) The grade II listed building complex of Bordesley Lodge Farmhouse (now MeadowFarm Public House), immediately to the north of the Master Plan area.

ii) St Stephens Chapel and Bordesley Abbey, both Scheduled Ancient Monuments,which lie outside the study area, but close to its southern boundary.

iii) A possible medieval settlement and associated fields, the archaeological importanceof which is unknown at this stage, in the area north of the River Arrow and south ofBordesley Lodge Farmhouse. This area has high archaeological potential if thesettlement ruins are present and well preserved.

4.44 It will be necessary for any proposed development within the setting of the listing buildingcomplex to have regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or anyspecial architectural or historic interest which it possesses. If necessary this may requireadequate natural screening to be provided between the listed buildings and newdevelopment and the scale of any proposed development at this location will need carefulconsideration.

4.45 While the Chapel and the remains of the Abbey are partly screened from view from thestudy area by the crematorium, it is important to ensure that any new development takingplace in the southern part of the site, close to the Abbey roundabout, does not harm thecharacter of the setting of those Scheduled Ancient Monuments, or inhibit public accessto them. There is, however, the opportunity to enhance public access to thesemonuments through better public transport links as part of the development, through theprovision of interpretation materials and signage (to encourage linked trips).

4.46 A detailed archaeological investigation will be required on the area of land whichpotentially accommodates the medieval settlement, prior to any permitted developmenttaking place.


General Conclusions Relating to Constraints

4.47 It can be concluded that of the three sites, the Abbey Stadium area exhibits the widestrange of significant constraints. This indicates that any development on this site shouldbe carefully considered and conceived so as to minimise its impact on the variousconstraints criteria identified. In particular, the Abbey Stadium site is considered to berelatively constrained in respect of potential risk of flooding, surface water drainage,landscape sensitivity, ecological sensitivity (River Arrow Special Wildlife Site) andarchaeology/cultural heritage (Bordesley Abbey and listed buildings).

4.48 The lands to the west of the Redditch-Birmingham railway line are also the subject ofsignificant constraints, with the most important of these being foul and surface waterdrainage and accessibility by non-car modes. These are mainly a result of the relativedetachment of (most of) this area of land from the built-up area of Redditch, and any newdevelopment would require new service infrastructure and the provision of an entirelynew public transport, cycleway and footpath network to link it to the remainder of thebuilt-up area.

4.49 The ADR land adjacent to the A441 benefits from having the potential for direct accessonto the major road network. However, the exact nature of that access will be determinedby the need to ensure that appropriate access can also be provided to the AbbeyStadium lands and the requirement not to jeopardise any potential route for theBordesley Bypass. A further key constraint which affects development on this land is thevisual sensitivity of the site, with most of the potentially developable land being highlyvisible from the A441, making the site an important visual gateway into the town, from thenorth via the M42/A441.


5.0 PREPARATION AND EVALUATION OF OPTIONS

5.01 During the course of preparing the Local Plan with the Master Plan as a BackgroundDocument (the original intention) various options were considered in order to meet theland use requirements set out in Section 3 and in the light of the constraints identified inSection 4.

5.02 Due to the limited scale of land available on the part of the ADR site between the railwayline and the A441 (Gallagher land) it was not be possible to meet all of the employmentland requirements on that land. Moreover, the site is relatively exposed and is a‘gateway’ site into Redditch via the A441, from the M42. It was therefore considered to beinappropriate for that site to accommodate certain types of general industrial (use classB2) activities, particularly which could be classed as ‘bad neighbours’, either from avisual or an environmental prospective.

5.03 The ADR land to the west of the railway and immediately to the north of the EnfieldIndustrial Estate is a comparatively less visually sensitive site for accommodating generalindustrial uses; it is well related to existing employment uses and is large enough toaccommodate all of the employment land requirements. However the prevailingtypography prevented the site from being physically suitable to accommodate all of theemployment land requirements. The land rises significantly to an escarpment which runsin a south-west/north-easterly direction to the railway line. Extensive ground remodellingwould be required on the rising land leading to the escarpment to create the flat buildingplatforms needed for employment related development.

5.04 Moreover, in the period beyond that covered by Local Plan No. 3, there is potential toaccommodate additional development requirements on parts of the ADR land notallocated in the Local Plan. In the interests of seeking to retain opportunities for mixeduse development (offering potential benefits of reduced car dependence) and achievingan appropriate balance of uses within the ADR in the longer term, it was important not tounduly concentrate individual land uses in any part of the ADR in the Local Plan.

5.05 The land use allocations within the ADR were made on the basis that it was impractical toseek to accommodate all of the employment land requirements on either one of the twoland holdings within the ADR; instead, it was decided that the allocations to meet therequirements should be split between the major land holdings (Gallagher andPersimmon) with the amount of employment land to be accommodated on each part ofthe ADR shown as follows:

5.5 ha of general employment use (B1, B2 and B8) on land west of the railway line(Persimmon Land).

3.1 ha for B1 use only on land east of the railway land (Gallagher Land).

5.06 It was acknowledged in proposing to allocate those sites that there was a requirement toprovide appropriate landscape buffers incorporating substantial new areas of treeplanting, in order to help screen proposed new employment uses where necessary andalso to separate those uses from any other future potential development on theremainder of the ADR land over the longer term.


5.07 Following receipt of representations during the preparation of Local Plan No.3, it wasconcluded that due to the uncertainties associated with the timing of delivery of theBordesley By-pass and the absence, at that time, of an agreed route and specification forthat road, it was necessary to retain a substantial road reservation area in Local PlanNo.3 to ensure that all potential options for that road provision could be accommodated.All of the options necessarily involve land take from the ADR east of the railway, althoughthe precise land requirements could not be determined until the detailed bypassspecification and route had been determined. Since one of the key aims of DevelopmentPlans is to provide greater certainty over the nature and timing of land use proposals andsince there was a specific employment land requirement to be met within a particulartimescale (i.e. by 2011), it was concluded that the most appropriate approach was toremove the employment designation on the ADR land east of the railway in Local PlanNo.3, but to continue to designate that land as ADR. This will enable a re-appraisal of thenature and scale of uses which would be appropriate on this land in the context of post2011 Borough wide requirements for new development, once these are known. Tocompensate for the loss of the 3.1 hectares of employment land on the Gallagher land, afurther 1.1ha were allocated on the Persimmon land with the remainder (2ha) beingallocated on land to the rear of the Alexandra Hospital.

5.08 Turning to the Abbey Stadium and adjoining lands, the assessment of potential land useoptions have taken into account a number of factors described below.

5.09 The first factor was the requirement to accommodate a number of sports and leisureuses for which there is an identified requirement within Redditch. The potential foraccommodating additional complementary uses to the core sports and leisurerequirements was also explored. The purpose of assessing a wider range of uses at thislocation was to examine the potential to create a multi-activity centre with significantcritical mass to ensure wide appeal (potentially to a wider population catchment than theBorough) and to maximise the longer term economic viability of the various componentelements.

5.10 After assessing the various options for providing and subsequently maintaining the sportsand leisure activities required to meet with needs of Redditch, including the potential torefurbish and extend existing facilities in situ, the Borough Council concluded that it nolonger represents best value to seek to provide those facilities entirely through the publicpurse and in and a disbursed manner throughout the Borough. The Council thereforedecided to work alongside the private sector in order to explore the potential for cross-subsidising the public sector facilities through commercial investment, with the aim ofcreating a large, comprehensive sports and leisure led scheme in a single location, that isable to attract custom from a wider area than the Borough.

5.11 Such a comprehensive development could enable the provision of exciting and unusualsports and leisure facilities that would not normally seek to locate in Redditch. Such aprovision could stimulate the towns some what moribund tourist trade and also providesignificant number of jobs in the service sector, helping to diversify the town’semployment base.

5.12 Ancillary uses such as small scale retailing, food and drink facilities and hotels could also


be attracted to the scheme, to complement the range of activities provided at this locationand to meet Borough-wide deficiencies in provision.

5.13 The potential of the site to accommodate a mixed use sports and leisure led scheme andbuilt development generally, is constrained by and dependent upon, the following factors:

i) The visual sensitivity of the site as a gateway location into the town via the A441, fromthe motorway system to the north of Redditch.

ii) The setting of the Abbey Stadium site and adjoining lands within the Arrow ValleyPark.

iii) The sensitivity of the adjoining crematorium and cemetery uses.

iv) The ecological sensitivity of the River Arrow and its embankments.

v) The presence of scheduled ancient monuments and listed buildings in theimmediate vicinity of the site.

vi) The capacity of the local road network to absorb the levels of traffic generationassociated with large scale development at this location, including the extent towhich additional traffic flows through the neighbouring village of Bordesley can beaccommodated.

vii) The currently poor level of accessibility of the site by modes of transport other thanthe car.

viii) The presence of residential accommodation in the vicinity of the site.

ix) The need to ensure that whatever development takes place on the Abbey Stadiumsite and adjoining lands, does not prevent future development opportunities on theADR lands, particularly on the Gallagher land on the opposite side of the A441 to theAbbey Stadium site.

5.14 In assessing where the required sports, recreation and leisure facilities could beaccommodated, the option of providing them on the ADR land east of the railway(Gallagher land) was considered. This was rejected on the ground that the Gallagherland is considerably more visually prominent and open than the Abbey Stadium site, as aresult of the existing strong vegetation screens bounding the Abbey Stadium site and thefact that the Abbey Stadium site is at a lower level than the Gallagher site and isrelatively flat. Since the required facilities will be housed in buildings that are necessarilysubstantial in terms of scale and massing, there is a greater likelihood of harmful impacton local visual amenity arising from such development on the ADR lands east of therailway.

5.15 In the following section, the recommended land use framework for the whole of the studyarea is set out and the development requirements and contributions which are expectedto be borne by developers are specified. The framework and therequirements/contributions arise directly from the policy guidance described in Section 3and at Appendix C and the development constraints identified in Section 4.


6.0 RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

6.01 The Master Plan drawings at Appendix F show the key elements of a land useframework for the study area. The Master Plan drawing for Site A provides adevelopment framework for the Brockhill ADR land, while the Master Plan drawing forSite B sets out a framework for development on the Abbey Stadium site and adjoininglands.

6.02 The precise configuration and extent of development within the study area will bedetermined in the light of specific planning applications. Nevertheless, any developmentwill be expected to accord with the general land use principles shown on the Master Plandrawings, so that the Local Plan requirements can be achieved.

The Master Plan for Site A (Brockhill ADR Land)

Land Uses

6.03 The drawing at Appendix F shows the extent of employment related developmentallocated on the Persimmon owned part of the Brockhill ADR site (land west of therailway line). The allocation site is linear, reflecting the existing elongated strip ofemployment land between Windsor Road and the Red Ditch.

Transportation Requirements

6.04 New vehicular accesses will be required to enable the new employment area to beconnected to the main road network. The employment allocation will be served from twonew vehicular access routes: one to be formed via the Enfield Industrial Estate, linking toWindsor Road; the other to be formed through linking to the existing roundabout junctionof Salters Lane/Brockhill Lane/Hewell Road/B4184.

6.05 Land to the east of the railway line (Gallagher) is safeguarded as a road reservation tofacilitate the future provision of the Bordesley Bypass. Following the grant of planningpermission for the bypass in March 2006, the preferred route is now known. From CobbsBarn roundabout in the north, the line of the proposed road runs south-west over theRiver Arrow, to the west of Bordesley. As it approaches the Birmingham to Redditchbranch railway line, the route bends round to the south-east, remaining to the east of therailway line. After crossing the existing Weights Lane it meets with the A441 at a newroundabout. The planning permission for the bypass indicates that in order to cater forfuture growth the bypass would need to be to dual carriageway standard and a designspeed of 50mph. The roundabout at its southern end would consist of five arms enablingaccess to the A441 (north and south bound), Weights Lane, Bordesley Bypass andproposed development on the Abbey Stadium site. The proposed route is shown atAppendix C.

6.06 Within the ADR land to the west of the railway it is important that the internal road systemis designed in such a manner that it:


i) Ensures appropriate future vehicular access to land identified on the Master Plandrawing A as land safeguarded as an Area of Development Restraint (ADR) in LocalPlan No. 3;

ii) Does not compromise the long term aspiration for the completion of the final linkbetween the Brockhill Distributor Road (Brockhill Drive) and the A441 BirminghamRoad. This link may be required to enable the development of the remainder of theADR land in the future, depending on the nature and scale of development whichcould take place on that land post 2011.

6.07 It will also be necessary to create a separate bus only link connecting from the allocatedemployment area to Windsor Road. This is to enable buses to follow a dedicated looproute through the site from the proposed two vehicular accesses, which will maximise theprospects of bus companies agreeing to diversions of existing bus services through thesite. An indicative route for that bus link is shown in Appendix F.

6.08 Various other transportation related requirements to be met as part of any developmenton the Brockhill ADR are set out in the Transportation Issues Report in Appendix D.These can be summarised as follows:

i) Negotiations to take place with local bus service providers to ensure the provision of aservice which links the development site with Redditch Town Centre, the bus stationand the railway station, with a frequency of no less than 30 minutes between 7amand 7pm on Mondays to Saturdays.

ii) No on or off street cycle links exist at the site at present and improvements aretherefore required in order that cycling is an attractive option for employees. An offroad facility will be required along Windsor Road to the south of the site which wouldlink into the Batchley Brook off road route. This facility should be provided as shouldthe link between the Batchley Brook route and the NCN route 5 on Windsor Street.The link into the existing and proposed NCN routes will give a high quality cyclingfacilities to the west of Redditch from the site.

iii) An improved cycle link is also required between the site and the Town Centre inorder that employees can cycle easily to the Town Centre facilities and the railwaystation.

iv) Opportunities to provide a shared use cycleway and footpath link between thePersimmon and Gallagher land holdings should be explored, to overcome thecurrent constraint of having to cycle or walk east to west via the busy MiddlehouseLane/Birmingham Road junction.

v) Signal controlled pedestrian crossing facilities will be required on Windsor Road andHewell Road so that employees from the Persimmon development will be able tocross these routes safely on their way to the Town Centre and/or place of residence.

vi) A pedestrian accessibility audit should be undertaken of the footways surroundingthe development site and the surfacing, drop curbs and tactile paving improvedwhere required.


Landscaping Requirements

6.09 The Master Plan illustrates the extent of significant existing vegetation within the BrockhillADR employment allocation site and also proposes areas of new planting which aregenerally intended to integrate the proposed new development into its setting and tocreate a new visual link between the upland and lowland landscape areas. The specificrequirements for new planting and/or retention are detailed below:

i) A 10 – 20m woodland buffer to be created on the northern side of the proposedvehicular access road serving the employment allocation. The purpose of this is toscreen the employment development from further longer term development on theADR retained in Local Plan No. 3.

ii) An area of woodland to be planted on the south-western boundary of Lowan’s HillFarm in order to restrict views into the new employment area from the west.

iii) The existing woodland area abutting the Redditch should be maintained and wherepossible enhanced through additional planting. This is intended to operate as alinear open space feature integrating a number of water features which would alsobe used as surface water run-off/balancing ponds. Opportunities to provide apedestrian link through that linear woodland area should be taken.

iv) A woodland screen is to be created alongside the railway and further woodlandplanting is required on the higher ground at the northern end of the Persimmon landholding. The intention is to create a framework of new planting around the edges ofthe area of land proposed to be retained as ADR in this Local Plan, so that if/whenthe land is needed for new development, the area within which new developmentcan be accommodated is clearly delineated.


Master Plan for Site B (Abbey Stadium Site and Adjoining Lands)

6.10 Appendix F sets out the general development principles for the Abbey Stadium site andadjoining lands. The following paragraphs describe the key elements of the developmentframework and the various on and off site requirements that will need to be met by anyproposed development on this site.

Key Land Use Principles

6.11 The key elements of the Master Plan for this area are as follows:

i) The central portion of the site (essentially consisting of the existing Abbey Stadium site)to be made available to accommodate assembly and leisure uses. The predominantcomponent of any mixed use scheme on the central site shall be for activities fallingwithin use class D2 indoor and outdoor sporting and recreational facilities. Ancillaryland uses falling within use classes A1 (retail) and A3/A4 and A5 (food and drink)will be acceptable subject to compliance with criteria in policy R.7 of Local Plan No.3.

ii) The areas of land to the north of the River Arrow and south of the listed buildings atMeadow Farm Public House and on the tear drop area south of the existing AbbeyStadium site to accommodate development which should be complementary to themain function of the mixed use development of the Abbey Stadium site. Appropriateland uses to include hotels (C1), food and drink (A3/A4 and A5) and training or otherfacilities (D1 or C2) subject to compliance with criteria in policy R.7 of Local Plan No.3.

iii) The creation and subsequent protection and enhancement of an ecological corridorencompassing the River Arrow and its immediate environs. This land must besafeguarded from development and appropriate measures will be taken to ensurethat the ecological value of this site is not undermined by any development takingplace on the land to the north and south of the river as described in i) and ii) above.

iv) The principal vehicular access to serve any new development at Abbey Stadiumshould be located at the northern end of the Abbey Stadium site to enableconnection to a new Weights Lane roundabout and to ensure that future vehicularaccess to the Gallagher landholding can be achieved. A potential secondary accessto serve the development on the Abbey Stadium site is shown on the Master Plan,linked to the Riverside roundabout. This access would be for buses, servicevehicles, emergency vehicles, pedestrians and cyclists only.

v) Substantial landscape buffers must be provided on the parts of the Abbey Stadiumsite abutting the A441 and the cemetery/crematorium in order to reduce the visualimpact of any new development, to integrate the new development into the parklandsetting and to protect the tranquillity of the cemetery/crematorium. It is necessary toprovide an appropriate landscape setting for the crematorium. The area of existingvegetation of woodland adjacent to the Riverside roundabout, at the southern end ofthe study area, should be retained.


6.12 Further details relating to the above and other important development requirements forthe lands are set out in the following paragraphs.

Transportation

6.13 One of the principal issues arising from accommodating significant levels of developmentat this location is the ability of the local road network to absorb the levels of trafficmovements likely to be generated. This issue is highlighted in sections 4 and 5 of thestudy. Whilst development of the whole of the land shown as having developmentpotential on the Master Plan drawing is likely to require the provision of the Bordesleybypass, the Secretary of State (when considering the called-in application) accepted thatthe traffic generated by the then proposed Abbey Stadium development would not itselfnecessitate the construction of the bypass by 2008 and that such development need notbe tied by condition to either the completion of the bypass or a programme for itsconstruction. Nevertheless, it is recognised that since all new development will putadditional traffic on to the A441, and hence bring forward the need for a bypass,development on the Abbey Stadium site must provide an appropriate contributiontowards the provision of the Bordesley by-pass as a pre-requisite of any planningpermission.

6.14 In addition to ensuring that the development is accessible to the private car it is arequirement of both Development Plan and national planning policy (PPS6, PPG13 andPPG17) that such major mixed use development is highly accessible by a choice ofmodes of transport other than the car. The current level of site accessibility for non-carmodes is relatively poor. Therefore, in order to enhance the accessibility of the location toacceptable levels, development of the site will be required to include contributionstowards the provision of footpaths and cycleways and enhancement to local bus serviceslinking to the town centre.

6.15 The assessment of constraints associated with this site raised a number of additionalplanning policy considerations which would need to be addressed as part of anydevelopment proposals on this part of the Master Plan area, through the requirementsset out in the following paragraphs.

Environmental Assessment

6.16 The scale and nature of any development likely to take place on this site is likely torequire an Environmental Assessment (under schedule 2 of the Town and CountyPlanning (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 1999).The Environmental Assessment must provide detailed information on the proposeddevelopment, assess the likely significant environmental consequences of thedevelopment and describe the measures proposed to mitigate or enhance suchconsequences. The Environmental Statement should also take into account anyguidance provided by the Department of Communities and Local Government on thepreparation of environmental statements.

Design of Development


6.17 The Master Plan identifies the scope for ‘keynote buildings’ which would provide a strongvisual presence at this gateway location to the town. Since the site is intended toaccommodate a comprehensive mixed use scheme, incorporating a range of land uses,the scale and height of the development could be substantial. While it is not considerednecessary to impose a specific limit on the potential height of development at thislocation, it is critical to ensure that any individual buildings or complex of buildings is ofthe highest architectural quality and that appropriate measures are taken, through acombination of design and landscaping, so that the visual impact associated with themassing and height of the building(s) is minimised.

6.18 To that end, any application (either full or outline) for development within the AbbeyStadium site or adjoining land, must be accompanied by a design and access statementwhich justifies the scale and massing of any proposed development and articulates thegeneral design principles to be adopted.

6.19 In the case of proposals made in outline where design matters are reserved for futuredetermination, the minimum requirement will be for the application to be accompanied byillustrative drawings of the elevational treatments and cross-section drawings illustratingthe building height and massing and the physical relationship of development to thesurrounding land uses.

Landscaping

6.20 While the Abbey Stadium site is located at an important entry point into Redditch from thenorth via the A441, direct views into the existing sports facilities from the A441 aresubstantially screened by a combination of existing mature boundary vegetation andground modelling. Existing dense vegetation on the boundaries of the Master Plan landto the north of the River Arrow and to the east of the A441, additionally screen views intothat site and also views into the Abbey Stadium site from the A441. Above that level ofvegetation, when seen from the A441 north of the site, are views of built development(Redditch Town Centre area). In a similar fashion, existing vegetation helps to screenviews into the Abbey Stadium site when viewed from the east and south (cemetery andcrematorium).

6.21 The presence of the mature boundary landscaping helps to create a parkland setting forexisting development on the Abbey Stadium site. It is, however, likely that newdevelopment on the Abbey Stadium site will be of a significantly larger scale than theexisting buildings on the site. As such, there is likelihood that the current visual screeningafforded by the natural vegetation on the site boundaries will not be wholly adequate toscreen new development (in places where it is necessary to do so) and/or to be able tomaintain a parkland character for built development, in keeping with the setting of thissite within the Arrow Valley Park.

6.22 Therefore, it would be necessary to ensure that appropriate and substantial landscapebuffers are retained on the main site boundaries within the Abbey Stadium site. Wherenecessary proposals will be required to enhance the provision of landscaping on thoseboundaries to enable effective integration of the new development into the parklandsetting. Landscape buffers varying from 10 to 20 m width are shown on the Master Plan


as an indication of the extent to which existing vegetation should be retained and newplanting required, on those boundaries.

6.23 Further planting may also be required on the boundary of the ‘development potentialarea’ to the north of the River Arrow, depending on the scale and height of proposeddevelopment on that site. The setting of the listed Meadow Farm public house complexwill also need to be preserved or enhanced, which may also involve additional screenplanting on that site boundary.

6.24 In view of the visual sensitivity of the setting for the crematorium, in order to maintain arespectful level of tranquillity for the daily activities at the crematorium and taking intoaccount the proximity of Scheduled Ancient Monuments at the southern end of theMaster Plan area, it is necessary to ensure that any development in the teardrop shapedarea adjacent to the Riverside Roundabout is of modest scale; is of low height (i.e. nomore than two storey); is not likely to give rise to noise disturbance or nuisance; andretains the existing building and structural landscaping along the boundary with the A441.Additional planting within the grounds of the crematorium will also need to be provided aspart of any development on the “teardrop” site, in order to ensure the retention of thesetting of the crematorium. In this respect, attention is drawn to the detailed wording ofpolicy R.7 of Local Plan No. 3 and its reasoned justification.

7.0 Achieving Sustainable Development

7.1 The purpose of the Master Plan is to establish a development framework and a set ofdevelopment principles for future development in the Master Plan area. However, theCouncil considers that it is vital that such development is sustainable and carried out insuch a way as to stand the test of time, and to this end, much of the content of theMaster Plan is aimed at ensuring that future development in its area is sustainable.

7.2 Development proposals coming forward in the Master Plan area will be required to followthe framework and principles set out in the Master Plan, but will also be required todemonstrate that regard has been had to national and local planning policies aimed atachieving sustainable development. This will include high quality development throughgood and inclusive design, and the efficient use of natural resources; ensuring that newdevelopment contributes to the creation of safe, liveable and mixed communities and theprotection and enhancement of the natural and historic environment.

7.3 In the light of present concerns regarding climate change and the role that planning canplay in addressing this problem and promoting renewable energy, developmentproposals within the Master Plan area will need to demonstrate that regard has been hadto relevant policies aimed at reducing climate change emissions and adapting to theimpacts of climate change. Such considerations will include reduction in energy use,reduction in emissions, use of renewable energy resources (photo-voltaics, solar heating,micro-generators) and taking climate change impacts into account in the location anddesign of development.

Documents

North West Redditch Master PlanNorth West Redditch Master Plan Supplementary Planning Document: Consultation Draft November –December 2006 2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 1.0 Study Team, Study