 |
|
|
| |
|
| 13 |
UTILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE |
| |
|
| |
INTRODUCTION |
| 13.1 |
This Chapter of the Local Plan relates
to the provision of public utilities and infrastructure works. It
covers such matters as telecommunications, transmission lines, pollution
prevention, energy conservation and the use of renewable resources. |
| |
GENERAL BACKGROUND |
| 13.2 |
The provision of public utilities and
infrastructure work is essential to the wellbeing of the community.
However, in an environmentally sensitive City such as Durham, the
impact of these services needs to be carefully assessed so that their
intrusion is minimised, wherever possible. This is of particular importance
for proposals in the Green Belt, Areas of High Landscape Value and
those which may affect the setting of the World Heritage Site. |
| 13.3 |
The encouragement of energy conservation
in the design and layout of development and the use of renewable resources
reflects the city Council's commitment to the principle of sustainability
as set out in its Environmental Charter. |
| |
LOCAL PLAN OBJECTIVES |
| 13.4 |
The Council's objectives for public utilities
and infrastructure works to be pursued through the Policies contained
in this Chapter of the Plan are: |
| |
- to ensure that public utility services and infrastructure are
provided to meet the needs of the District's population and that
new development is adequately provided for.
- to minimise the impact of infrastructure provision upon the
environment, the landscape and the World Heritage site.
- to have regard to the principles of sustainability and energy
conservation.
|
| |
|
| |
POLICIES |
| |
PUBLIC UTILITIES |
| |
Telecommunications |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U1 |
POLICY U1 WHEN CONSIDERING APPLICATIONS
FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT, THE COUNCIL WILL GRANT PLANNING
PERMISSION WHERE THE BENEFITS ARISING FROM THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD
OUTWEIGH ANY ENVIRONMENTAL DAMAGE. THE FOLLOWING FACTORS WILL
BE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION: |
| |
1. |
THE SPECIFIC OPERATIONAL NEEDS
AND LOCATIONAL REQUIREMENTS OF THE PROPOSAL; AND |
| |
2. |
THE SIGNIFICANCE OF
THE PROPOSAL AS PART OF A NATIONAL NETWORK; AND |
| |
3. |
THE OPERATIONAL SUITABILITY AND
ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF ALTERNATIVE SITES; AND |
| |
4. |
THE POSSIBILITY OF SHARED USE
OF EXISTING SITES AND STRUCTURES; AND |
| |
5. |
ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENTS INCLUDING
ACCESS ROADS AND ANCILLARY BUILDINGS; AND |
| |
6. |
THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE DESIGN
OF THE EQUIPMENT AND THE SITE AND ITS SURRONDINGS; AND |
| |
7. |
THE ADEQUACY OF SCREENING TO THE
GROUND STATION; AND |
| |
8. |
THE EFFECTS ON THE OPENNESS OF
THE GREEN BELT; AND |
| |
9. |
THE ADEQUACY OF ARRANGEMENTS TO
ENSURE THE REMOVAL OF REDUNDANT EQUIPMENT AND THE RESTORATION
OF THE SITE. |
| |
PROPOSALS WITHIN STATUTORY DESIGNATED
AREAS WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED WHERE THERE ARE NO ALTERNATIVE
SUITABLE SITES AVAILABLE AND THERE IS A PROVEN NATIONAL NEED
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
|
|
|
| |
| POLICY U2 |
THE COUNCIL WILL NOT PERMIT TELECOMMUNICATION
EQUIPMENT WHICH WOULD HAVE A DETRIMENTAL VISUAL IMPACT UPON
THE SETTING OF THE WORLD HERITAGE SITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH POLICY
E3. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.5 |
In line with Government advice contained
in PPG8 (Telecommunications), the Council is committed to facilitating
the growth of new and existing telecommunications systems, in the
light of the changing technologies involved. It recognises, however,
that the industry benefits from a considerable level of de-regulation
and large telecommunication developments such as new masts and other
large structures can have a significant visual impact upon the landscape
particularly in areas of such environmentally sensitivity as Durham
City. Often, due to operational requirements, developments have to
be located in elevated positions, thereby exacerbating their impact
on the environment. Careful consideration needs to be given to the
impact of telecommunication development on the setting and character
of the City and in particular to its effect on important views. Proposals
which have a visual impact upon of the setting of the World Heritage
Site will be resisted. |
| 13.6 |
PPG8 and Durham County Structure Plan
(Policy 47) seek to protect statutory designated sites, including
Green Belts, Conservation Areas and Sites of Special Scientific Interest,
from impact of telecommunications developments, particularly in terms
of height, siting and design. The Council will, therefore, only consider
telecommunications developments in these sensitive locations when
there is no alternative suitable site available and the benefits arising
from the development to the local community and the national economy
outweigh any environmental damage. |
| 13.7 |
The proximity of telecommunications facilities
in relation to residential areas can give rise to localised problems
during installation and routine servicing. Considerable public disquiet
about potentially harmful health effects arising from the radiation
emitted from these facilities is acknowledged. Whilst there is no
evidence that precautions are necessary to distance installations
from dwellings, schools or other uses, this issue is subject to ongoing
monitoring. |
| 13.8 |
The Council will seek to encourage the
shared use of existing telecommunications facilities, wherever possible,
in order that a proliferation of masts is avoided. Applicants will
be expected to provide evidence that they have explored the possibility
of alternative sites including the erection of antennae on existing
buildings, masts or structures, although there may be occasions where
the degree of prominence which would result, renders these locations
inappropriate. |
| 13.9 |
The Council will encourage early consultation
with operators to enable the requirements of telecommunication networks
and the routing and phasing of network development to be taken into
account. |
| |
Transmission Lines |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U3 |
PROPOSALS FOR OVERHEAD POWER LINES
SHOULD HAVE PARTICULAR REGARD TO THE EFFECT ON: |
| |
1. |
THE CONTRIBUTION WHICH LAND IN
THE GREEN BELT MAKES TO THE SETTING AND SPECIAL CHARACTER OF
DURHAM CITY; OR |
| |
2. |
AREA OF HIGH LANDSCAPE
VALUE; OR |
| |
3. |
THE WORLD HERITAGE SITE; OR |
| |
4. |
CONSERVATION AREAS OR SITES OR
BUILDINGS OF PARTICULAR HISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL OR ARCHITECTURAL
INTEREST; OR |
| |
5. |
DESIGNATED SITES OF NATURE CONSERVATION;
OR |
| |
6. |
EXISTING OR ALLOCATED RESIDENTIAL
AREAS; OR |
| |
7. |
AREAS OF FORMAL RECREATION, PARKS
AND PUBLIC OPEN SPACES. |
| |
IN FORMULATING PROPOSALS THE ELECTRICITY
PROVIDER SHALL DO WHAT IT REASONABLY CAN TO MITIGATE ANY EFFECT
ON THESE AREAS. |
| |
IN PARTICULARLY SENSITIVE LOCATIONS,
THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK THE UNDER-GROUNDING OF LOW VOLTAGE (132
kV AND BELOW) POWER LINES. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.10 |
Although the Council is only a statutory
consultee under the powers of the Electricity Act 1989, it recognises
that overhead power lines can be visually prominent and damaging to
the landscape especially within the Green Belt, Conservation Areas
and Areas of High Landscape Value. It also recognises that the impact
of power lines upon the amenity of local residents living close to
them make it desirable to route them away from residential areas.
In view of the substantial practical, technical and cost disadvantages
involved, the undergrounding of high voltage power lines (275 kV and
above) will only be sought in exceptional circumstances. In particularly
sensitive locations, however, the Council will seek the undergrounding
of low voltage (132 kV and below) power lines. |
| 13.11 |
The Council recognise that sensitive nature
conservation sites could be adversely affected by the undergrounding
of power lines. Criteria 5 of Policy U3 seeks to protect the nature
conservation interests of these areas in compliance with Policies
E16-20 of the Plan, except where such undergrounding will affect nature
conservation sites, or areas of high archaeological or historic interest. |
| |
Underground Services |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U4 |
THE COUNCIL WILL SEEK THE PROVISION
OF ADEQUATE UNDERGROUND DUCTING IN NEW DEVELOPMENT, TO ENABLE
ALL FUTURE SERVICES TO BE PROVIDED UNDERGROUND. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.12 |
Most services are routed underground and
cause no visual disturbance. However overhead electricity supply lines
and telephone lines and associated poles and pylons can adversely
affect the visual environment. In all new developments, therefore,
the Council will expect these services to be sited beneath the ground.
Where it is considered appropriate, the Council will encourage Statutory
Undertakers to place existing overhead services underground. |
| |
POLLUTION PREVENTION |
| |
General |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U5 |
PLANNING PERMISSION FOR DEVELOPMENT
THAT MAY GENERATE POLLUTION WILL NOT BE GRANTED IF THE PROPOSAL: |
| |
1. |
WILL HAVE AN UNACCEPTABLE ADVERSE
IMPACT UPON THE QUALITY OF THE LOCAL ENVIRONMENT. |
| |
2. |
WILL HAVE AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT UPON THE AMENITY OF NEARBY AND ADJOINING LAND
AND PROPERTY. |
| |
3. |
WILL UNNECESSARILY CONSTRAIN THE
DEVELOPMENT OF NEIGHBOURING LAND. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.13 |
Development that may, for example, generate
pollution of water, air, soil, noise, vibration, light, heat or radiation
include certain industrial uses, intensive livestock units and outdoor
leisure activities such as motorsports and shooting. They should be
located away from sensitive uses such as housing, schools, hospitals
and residential and nursing homes. |
| 13.14 |
Where appropriate, conditions will be
applied to control the level of emissions from these uses by controlling
the hours of operation, the nature of the activities carried out,
and the number and type of vehicles used. Other measures such as mounding
and baffle fencing may be required, where necessary, to ensure that
the level of emission does not exceed acceptable levels and does not
result in a reduction of the quality of the local environment, including
the air, soil, ground water, rivers and streams. |
| |
|
|
|
| |
| POLICY U6 |
DEVELOPMENTS AIMED AT PREVENTING
POLLUTION FROM AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED SOURCE WILL BE PERMITTED
PROVIDED THAT THE PROPOSAL: |
| |
1. |
WILL NOT HAVE AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT UPON THE QUALITY OF THE LOCAL ENVIRONMENT; AND |
| |
2. |
WILL NOT HAVE AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT UPON THE AMENITY OF NEARBY AND ADJOINING LAND
AND PROPERTY. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.15 |
This Policy is aimed at encouraging the
construction of anti pollution measures and it of special significance
to farmers who may need to provide storage facilities to comply with
Control of Pollution Regulations (1991). Such facilities may include
structures such as slurry stores and silage effluent tanks. |
| |
|
|
|
| |
| POLICY U7 |
DEVELOPMENTS WHICH ARE SENSITIVE
TO POLLUTION WILL NOT BE PERMITTED ON LAND WHICH IS SUBJECT
TO UNACCEPTABLE LEVELS OF CONTAMINATION, POLLUTION, NOISE OR
VIBRATION. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.16 |
Developments, which are sensitive to pollution
of water, air, soil, noise, vibration, light, heat or radiation are
those whose location close to sources of pollution would be harmful
or especially disruptive to the quality of life of the occupiers or
users of the building. They include places where people live, are
educated, receive health care or meet together. These developments
should be sited away from land, which is contaminated to an unacceptable
degree or manner, uses that generate levels or noise, vibration or
other pollutants above recognised acceptable limits. |
| |
Sewage Treatment
Works and Sewerage Systems |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U8 |
THE COUNCIL WILL PERMIT OR IF
CONSULTED WILL RESPOND FAVOURABLY TO DEVELOPMENT WHICH WILL
ENABLE WATER AND SEWAGE UNDERTAKERS TO MEET THEIR STATUTORY
OBLIGATIONS PROVIDED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT: |
| |
1. |
IS SUITABLY LOCATED IN RELATION
TO THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. |
| |
2. |
DOES NOT HAVE AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT UPON THE AMENITY OF NEIGHBOURING OCCUPIERS FROM
SMALL INCREASES IN NOISE, SMELL, TRAFFIC AND GENERAL DISTURBANCE. |
| |
3. |
DOES NOT HAVE AN UNACCEPTABLE
ADVERSE IMPACT UPON LANDSCAPE QUALITY OF THE AREA OR AREAS OF
NATURE CONSERVATION IN ACCORDANCE WITH POLICIES E10 AND E18. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.17 |
There are 32 sewage treatment facilities
within the District ranging in size from septic tanks and soakaway
systems dealing with a handful of properties and discharging to groundwater
to sizeable sewage treatment works. Much of the sewerage system within
Durham deals with combined foul and surface water flows resulting
in the need for combined sewer overflows (CSOs) to relieve the system
during period of high rainfall in order to prevent surcharging of
manhole and localised flooding. A number of overflows have been identified
as unsatisfactory regarding their nature or excessive operation or
being situated in sensitive locations. Water Company Investment is
agreed in advanced on a five year rolling basis and entitled Asset
Management Plan (AMP). The current AMP3 covering investment from the
year 2000-2005 has been agreed. Sewage works investment shall enable
compliance with statutory drivers such as the EC Urban Waste Water
Treatment Directive (UWWT) (91/271/EEC) and non-statutory achievement
of river quality objective improvements. Over 20 unsatisfactory CSOs
have been highlighted for investment as part of the UWWT Directive
Schedule. |
| 13.18 |
The siting of new sewage works or extensions
to existing works to meet appropriate standards of treatment will
largely be influence by the current drainage system and the need to
avoid adversely affecting the amenities of neighbouring occupiers
or the area as a whole. The location of these facilities in or on
the edge of open countryside requires both sensitive siting, respect
for the local environment and a major investment in landscaping works. |
| |
|
|
|
| |
| POLICY U8A |
DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS WILL ONLY
BE APPROVED IF THEY INCLUDE SATISFACTORY ARRANGEMENTS FOR DISPOSING
FOUL AND SURFACE WATER DISCHARGES. WHERE SATISFACTORY ARRANGEMENTS
ARE NOT AVAILABLE, THEN PROPOSALS MAY BE APPROVED SUBJECT TO
THE SUBMISSION OF A SATISFACTORY SCHEME AND ITS IMPLEMENTATION
BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT IS BROUGHT INTO USE. ALL SCHEMES RESULTING
FROM THIS REQUIREMENT SHOULD COMPLY WITH POLICY U8. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.20 |
All development should include adequate
foul and surface water drainage arrangements. Where existing sewage
infrastructure is insufficient to accommodate the proposed development,
then that development will only be permitted submitted to submission
of a scheme of works for disposing of foul and surface water discharge,
and the implementation of such a scheme, before the development is
brought into use. |
| |
Sewage Treatment
Works in the Green Belt |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U8B |
THE COUNCIL WILL PERMIT OR IF
CONSULTED WILL RESPOND FAVOURABLY TO DEVELOPMENT BY STATUTORY
WATER AND SEWAGE UNDERTAKERS IN THE DURHAM CITY GREEN BELT PROVIDED
THAT: |
| |
1. |
NEW DEVELOPMENT OR THE IMPROVEMENT
OR MAINTENANCE OF EXISTING ASSETS IS REQUIRED TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE
WITH QUALITY STANDARDS IN NATIONAL AND EUROPEAN LAW; AND |
| |
2. |
THE PROPOSAL WILL
NOT HAVE AN UNACCEPTABLE IMPACT ON THE OPENNESS OF THE GREEN
BELT; AND |
| |
3. |
THE PROPOSAL WILL NOT PREJUDICE
THE PURPOSES FOR INCLUDING LAND IN THE GREEN BELT. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.20A |
Twelve sewage treatment works and two
reservoir are located in the Durham City Green Belt. The works affected
are those at Aldin Grange, Bakers Haugh, Belmont, Brasside, Browney,
Leamside, Pity Me, Sherburn House, Stonebridge, Sunderland Bridge,
Witton Gilbert and University together with the reservoirs at Auton
Stile and Mountjoy. The Council recognises the need to make provision
throughout the plan period for essential development by the water
and sewage undertakers to meet their statutory duties. |
| 13.20B |
National and European Law will require
significant improvements to most if not all of the works over the
plan period. New or additional capacity may be required to meet the
demands of new development and other factors. Auton Stile Reservoir
may need to be rebuilt or supplemented by an additional reservoir
over the plan period. None of these facilities can easily be economically
relocate elsewhere. |
| 13.20C |
The provision of essential facilities
for uses which preserve the openness of the Green Belt and which do
not conflict with the purposes of including land within it, is not
necessarily inappropriate development. The Council will permit such
proposals provided the statutory water and sewage undertakers can
demonstrate that the development is necessary to meet National and
European quality standards. |
| 13.20D |
Where the statutory water and sewage undertakers
propose development, which is necessary, but would not preserve the
openness of the Green Belt or would conflict with the purposes of
including land in it, then it will be considered inappropriate development.
Inappropriate development is by definition harmful and should not
be approved except in very special circumstances. It will be for the
applicant to show that any harm to the Green Belt is clearly outweighed
by other considerations an permission should, therefore, be granted.
Such inappropriate development would be referred to the Secretary
of State under the Town and Country Planning (Development Plans and
Consultation) Directions 1999. |
| 13.20E |
In some cases it will be appropriate for
a proposal to be subject to environmental assessment (EA) and for
the water company to submit an Environmental Statement, as set out
in Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact
Assessment) Regulations 1999, before planning permission can be granted. |
| |
Water Courses |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U9 |
DEVELOPMENTS WHICH MAY DIRECTLY
AFFECT WATERCOURSES WILL ONLY BE PERMITTED PROVIDED THAT: |
| |
1. |
THEY DO NOT RESULT IN FLOODING
OR INCREASE FLOOD RISK ELSEWHERE; |
| |
2. |
THEY DO NOT RESULT
IN THE POLLUTION OF THE WATERCOURSE; |
| |
3. |
THEY DO NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT NATURE
CONSERVATION INTERESTS; |
| |
4. |
THEY DO NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE
VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE LANDSCAPE; |
| |
5. |
THEIR ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT IS PROPERLY
ASSESSED. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.21 |
Development works in the vicinity of watercourses
may lead to problems both directly through an increased risk of flooding,
erosion of the beds and banks of watercourse and restricted access
for maintenance and indirectly through alterations to drainage patterns
and the quality of surface water run-off. Proper assessment of the
environmental impact of a development on a watercourse should be undertaken.
Mitigating measures required to balance any adverse impacts will need
to be designed and carried out in accordance with the requirements
of the Environment Agency. |
| 13.22 |
Culverting of watercourses will not normally
be permitted since it results in a break in the continuity of the
river corridor and may also have serious implications for safety,
maintenance and flooding, as well as nature conservation interests.
Culverts will only be approved if there is not reasonably practical
alternatives or if the detrimental effects would be so minor that
they would not justify a more costly alternative. |
| 13.23 |
Rivers and streams are important resources
offering conservation, landscape, amenity and recreational value.
They are important linear features which can form the basis for wildlife
corridors and promoting ecological diversity. They form a continuum
of habitats from the flowing main channel to aquatic, semi-aquatic
and terrestrial environment. Such features often support a large number
of species identified as globally threatened or declining and which
will also be identified in the U.K. Bio-diversity Action Plan |
| |
Development in Flood
Risk Areas |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U10 |
PROPOSALS FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT
SHALL NOT BE PERMITTED IN FLOOD RISK AREAS OR WHERE DEVELOPMENT
MAY INCREASE THE RISK OF FLOODING ELSEWHERE UNLESS IT CAN BE
DEMONSTRATED BY MEANS OF A FLOOD RISK ASSESSMENT AND SEQUENTIAL
TEST THAT: |
| |
1. |
THERE IS NO ALTERNATIVE OPTION
AVAILABLE AT NO RISK OR AT A LOWER RISK OF FLOODING; |
| |
2. |
THERE WILL BE NO UNACCEPTABLE
RISK OF FLOODING; |
| |
3. |
THERE WILL BE NO UNACCEPTABLE INCREASE
IN RISK OF FLOODING ELSEWHERE, AS A RESULT OF THE DEVELOPMENT;
AND |
| |
4. |
APPROPRIATE MITIGATION MEASURES
CAN BE PUT IN PLACE TO MINIMISE THE RISK OF FLOODING AND THESE
MEASURES CAN BE CONTROLLED BY APPROPRIATE PLANNING CONDITIONS
OR A SECTION 106 AGREEMENT CAN BE SECURED. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.24 |
New development, redevelopment and land
raising can have significant implications for flood risk. Within river
flood plains, new development may increase the risk of flooding elsewhere
by reducing the storage capacity of the flood plain and impeding flood
flow. An indicative flood plain of the River Wear which identifies
potential flood risk areas has been produced by the Environment Agency. |
| 13.24A |
PPG25 requires that a risk-based approach
be adopted for proposals for development in or affecting flood-risk
areas or where the development may increase flood risk elsewhere.
It is the responsibility of the parties promoting particular developments
to carry out a flood risk assessment (FRA) prior to the determination
of planning applications. The Council will be minded to refuse planning
permission until a satisfactory FRA has been submitted. The level
of detail required for a FRA may vary depending on the size, scale
and location of development but all FRA's should be in accordance
with Appendix F of PPG25. |
| |
CONTAMINATED LAND |
| |
Development on Contaminated
Land |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U11 |
DEVELOPMENT ON SITES WHICH ARE
KNOWN TO BE, OR SUSPECTED OF BEING CONTAMINATED WILL ONLY BE
PERMITTED PROVIDED THAT: |
| |
1. |
THE NATURE AND EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
IS FIRST ESTABLISHED; |
| |
2. |
THE DEVELOPMENT WILL
NOT ADD TO THE LEVEL OF CONTAMINATION; |
| |
3. |
PROPOSALS FOR DEVELOPMENT INCLUDE
REMEDIAL MEASURES WHICH ADDRESS THE ACTUAL OR POTENTIAL HAZARD
OF CONTAMINANCE IDENTIFIED; |
| |
4. |
THERE IS NO DETRIMENTAL AFFECT
ON THE ENVIRONMENT AS A RESULT OF THE DISTURBANCE OF CONTAMINATES
DURING AND AFTER DEVELOPMENT. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.25 |
Contamination may result from land previously
used by industries employing hazardous substances. Alternatively contaminated
land may include completed domestic and industrial landfill sites
where combustion might be induced, settlement is occurring, leachates
are being generated or gas emissions are happening. The hazard to
which this may give rise can put at risk people working on the site,
the occupiers and users of buildings and land, the buildings themselves
and water services. Unless precautions are taken, contaminants may
escape to cause air and water pollution, while emissions of landfill
gases may lead to concentrations in which explosions or asphyxiation
may occur. |
| 13.26 |
Within the context of securing sustainable
development by the full and effective use of land within settlements
the redevelopment of contaminated sites may generally be desirable.
The former Cape Universal site at Bowburn is a prime example. |
| 13.27 |
Before development takes place on such
sites, however, it is important that the nature and extent of contamination
is fully understood. As a result measures must be incorporated into
any proposals to ensure the protection of buildings, services and
other infrastructure against possible harmful effects of the substances
involved, and to prevent the exposure of personnel to materials which
may be prejudicial to their health or safety. |
| |
Development near
Contaminated Land |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U12 |
DEVELOPMENT WILL ONLY PERMITTED
ADJACENT TO, OR IN THE VICINITY OF, CONTAMINATED SITES WHERE
IT CAN BE SHOWN THAT: |
| |
1. |
MEASURES CAN BE UNDERTAKEN ON
THE PERIPHERY OR WITHIN THE SITE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
WHICH WOULD BE SUFFICIENT TO STOP CONTAMINANTS, LEACHATE OR
GASES PENETRATING THE SITE AND ACCUMULATING IN BUILDINGS AND
STRUCTURES IN QUANTITIES WHICH COULD PROVE HARMFUL; OR |
| |
2. |
GROUND CONDITIONS
AROUND THE CONTAMINATED SITE ARE SUCH AS TO PREVENT GASES MIGRATING
INTO SURROUNDING LAND. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.28 |
The threat from contaminants may not be
confined to the site itself. Landfill gases and leachates have the
ability to migrate over wide distances depending upon ground conditions.
If the floor of a landfill site has not been properly sealed with
an impermeable layer or the sub-soil and ground conditions are of
friable or fractured materials, the potential exists for gases to
spread underground away from the site until such time as an obstruction
is met or a way to the surface reached. The foundations of a building,
drains and pipelines may provide such an escape route. |
| 13.29 |
In order that considerable areas around
such sites are not needlessly sterilised against development, the
Council will expect potential developers of sites nearby to demonstrate
that ground conditions and topography are such that underground migration
of contaminates to their site will not occur. Where this cannot be
shown, it will be open to developers to introduce measures which protect
their sites against penetration by gas. |
| |
Development on Unstable
Land |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U13 |
DEVELOPMENT ON UNSTABLE LAND WILL
ONLY BE PERMITTED IF IT IS PROVED THAT THERE IS NO RISK TO THE
DEVELOPMENT OR ITS INTENDED OCCUPIERS OR USERS FROM SUCH INSTABILITY
OR THAT SATISFACTORY REMEDIAL MEASURES CAN BE UNDERTAKEN. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.30 |
The effects of ground instability vary
in their nature, scale and extent. At their most extreme, they may
threaten life and health or cause damage to buildings and structures.
Whilst such risks are small there is a need to ensure that development
is suitable and that the physical constraints on the land are taken
into account at all stages of planning. |
| 13.31 |
Instability may be caused through the
effects of underground activities, unstable slopes or ground compression.
Where instability is known or suspected the developer will be required
to provide a specialist investigation and to propose adequate remedial
measures, where appropriate, as part of a planning application. |
| |
ENERGY CONSERVATION |
| |
General |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U14 |
THE COUNCIL WILL ENCOURAGE THE
EFFECTIVE USE OF PASSIVE SOLAR ENERGY AND THE REDUCTION OF WIND-CHILL
IN THE LAYOUT, DESIGN AND ORIENTATION OF BUILDINGS, AND THE
USE OF ENERGY EFFICIENT MATERIALS AND CONSTRUCTION TECHNIQUES. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.32 |
A significant proportion of the energy
used in the United Kingdom is associated with buildings, and the burning
of fossil fuels to produce this energy has a significant effect on
global warming through the "greenhouse effect". Local action to conserve
energy by the maximum use of solar radiation and minimising the cooling
effects of the wind can play its part in ameliorating this global
issue. The orientation and inter-relationship of buildings, their
detailed design and the materials used in their construction (e.g.
more glazing and photo voltaic roofing) can reduce energy needs. |
| |
Renewable Resources |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U15 |
PROPOSALS FOR THE GENERATION OF
ENERGY FROM RENEWABLE RESOURCES WILL BE PERMITTED PROVIDED THAT
THERE IS NO UNACCEPTABLE ADVERSE IMPACT ON: |
| |
1. |
THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE LANDSCAPE
AND THE OPENNESS OF THE GREEN BELT; |
| |
2. |
FLORA AND FAUNA AND
OTHER NATURE CONSERVATION INTERESTS; |
| |
3. |
THE AMENITY, HEALTH AND SAFETY
OF LOCAL RESIDENTS; |
| |
4. |
NOISE AND VIBRATION LEVELS, INCLUDING
ELECTROMAGNETIC INTERFERENCE; |
| |
5. |
AREAS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL, ARCHITECTURAL
OR HISTORIC INTEREST. |
| |
PROPOSALS SHOULD INCLUDE A SATISFACTORY
SCHEME TO RESTORE THE SITE TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION ONCE OPERATIONS
HAVE CEASED. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.33 |
Renewable energy systems differ from fossil
fuel and nuclear energy systems in their relationship to land use
and the environment. They tend to be of lower energy output for an
equivalent area of land and a variety of factors have to be taken
into account when assessing planning applications for renewable energy
systems. |
| 13.34 |
The use of energy generated from renewable
resources, is expected to increase during the Plan period. Developments
such as those associated with solar power and hydro power have little
impact on amenity. However others such as wind farms (i.e. groups
of two or more turbines) can only operate efficiently in certain localities
which have relatively high annual mean wind speeds and are normally
exposed areas of open countryside often in upland regions. Examples
of such locations within the District include the Magnesian Limestone
ridge to the east and the uplands in the west bordering Wear Valley
District Council. Whilst the Council supports the concept of renewable
energy, wind farms may, as well as being visually prominent, be a
source of noise, shadow flicker, electromagnetic interference and
can affect the safety and ecology of the area. In order to minimise
these potential impacts, applications will be judged against the criteria
outlined in the Policy. |
| 13.35 |
In line with Government Guidance set out
in PPG2 (Green Belt) and PPG22 (Renewable Resources) and Policy E1
of the Plan, the development of wind farms, incorporating two or more
turbines, will not be permitted in the Green Belt because of their
detrimental visual impact on the openness of this designated area. |
| |
RECYCLING |
|
|
| |
| POLICY U17 |
SITES FOR USE BY THE PUBLIC FOR
THE COLLECTION OF RECYCLABLE CONSUMER WASTE PRODUCTS WILL BE
PERMITTED THROUGHOUT THE DISTRICT PROVIDED THEY ARE CONVENIENT
AND ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC AND WILL NOT HAVE A DETRIMENTAL
IMPACT UPON LOCAL AMENITY OR HIGHWAY SAFETY. |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
| |
Justification |
| 13.36 |
The Council is committed to promoting
the conservation and sustainable use of material resources through
its Environmental Charter and support for Local Agenda 21. The recycling
of consumer waste products is an important element of this and 19
sites have been established throughout the District for the collection
of items such as glass bottles and jars, foods and drink cans, newspapers
and magazines and unwanted clothing and textiles. Further sites will
be provided during the Plan period at locations which are convenient
and accessible and will not have a detrimental impact upon local amenity. |
| |
| |
| |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| top |