shropshire council development, demographic and economic trends ...
SHROPSHIRE COUNCIL
DEVELOPMENT, DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC TRENDS 1998-2008 Analysis of Trends to support the Core Strategy Publication 15 February 2010
TECHNICAL PAPER
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Introduction This paper outlines some of the considerations that have informed the draft Core Strategy, and in particular the following three areas: 1. Spatial split of development across the five spatial zones in Shropshire (Core Strategy policy CS1 and CS2) 2. The Settlement Strategy, or spread of development between the subregional centre, market towns and other key centres, and the rural area (Core Strategy policies CS1, CS4, CS5 and CS14) 3. Market Town level of development (Core Strategy policy CS3)
Part 1 SPATIAL SPLIT Spatial zones in relation to district boundaries The Core Strategy identifies five spatial zones within Shropshire, as shown in figure 1 overleaf. These deliberately overlap, to reflect functional relationships across the former district authority boundaries. However, for the purpose of analysing trends, it is necessary to use data for the former districts to avoid double-counting any data. To do this, we have actually used the new administrative boundaries for the local joint committee areas put in place by the Unitary Shropshire Council. These are shown in figure 2 and are related to the former district boundaries which are outlined in black. Table 1: composition of spatial zones Comprised of Core Strategy Local Joint Spatial zone Committee Areas North West
1, 2, 6, 7, 8
North East
3, 4, 5
Central Shrewsbury
Comparison with former district boundaries Larger than Oswestry Borough it now contains Ellesmere (LJC2) and LJC7, part of which was formerly in North Shropshire Smaller than North Shropshire District having lost LJC2 and part LJC7
9, 10, 16 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 27, 28
South
19, 20, 24, 25, 26
East
17, 18, 21, 22, 23
Identical to Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Larger than South Shropshire District it now contains part of LJC26 formerly in Bridgnorth District Smaller than Bridgnorth District it has lost part of LJC26 to the South zone
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Figure 1:
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Figure 2: Local Joint Committee areas and former district boundaries
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Converting district statistics into spatial zones To inform the Core Strategy, we have represented district level statistics into the new spatial zones using the Local Joint Committee areas. This changes the proportional distribution of the population as shown in Table 2. Table 2: Conversion from district data to spatial zone data Estimated Proportional Estimated Population Distribution Population Spatial District of District between of spatial zone 2007 Districts zone 2007 Oswestry 40,308 NW 50,453 14% Borough North Shropshire 60,099 NE 49,999 21% District Shrewsbury & Atcham 95,998 Central 96,275 33% Borough South Shropshire 42,709 South 44,889 14% District Bridgnorth 51,939 East 49,437 18% District Shropshire
291,053
100%
Shropshire
291,053
Proportional Distribution between Zone 18% 17%
33%
15% 17% 100%
As the map in Figure 2 above illustrates: • the Central spatial zone is geographically identical to the former Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough area, although population estimates are slightly different due to rounding in the underlying calculations; • the North West spatial zone is more extensive than the former Oswestry Borough Council area, and conversely the North East spatial zone is smaller than the former North Shropshire District area; • the South spatial zone is larger than the former South Shropshire District area, containing all of Local Joint Committee area 26 and the East spatial zone is smaller than the former Bridgnorth District Council area. Estimates of household growth in Shropshire Three external sources give different estimates of household growth in Shropshire, as shown in Table 3 below. The proportionate split between the districts is shown in table 4 and this has been represented to give the proportionate split between the spatial zones in Table 5 to inform the Core Strategy. District-level household figures have been converted into spatial zones using the following conversion factors derived from the population changes from the districts into the spatial zones: Oswestry Borough (125.2%), North Shropshire District (83.2%), Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough (100.3%), South Shropshire District (105.1%) and Bridgnorth District (95.2%).
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
In addition, the Council’s in-house PLUMS monitoring database of completions has been assigned to the spatial zones (using the Local Joint Committee areas in Table 2) and the results are also shown in Table 5. The extrapolation to 2026 is based on actual completions 1998-2008, converted to an average annual rate, and multiplied by 20 years for the period from 2006 to 2026. Table 3: Estimated Growth in households in Shropshire 2006-2026 2006 Cambridge RSS Phase Centre for subnational 2 Preferred Housing and Option household Planning District projections Research1 Oswestry Borough 6,618 6,900 4,000 North Shropshire District 6,888 5,800 6,100 Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough 6,886 6,900 8,200 South Shropshire District 5,399 5,800 4,900 Bridgnorth District 3,697 3,100 2,500 total 29,488 28,500 25,7002 1 2
used by WMRA at RSS Phase 2 examination May 2009 The Panel Report, following the RSS Phase 2 examination, increased Shropshire’s allocation by 1,900 homes but did not suggest how they should be distributed. The new allocation for Shropshire is 27,500.
Table 4: Percentage growth in households in Shropshire 2006-2026 2006 Cambridge RSS Phase subnational Centre for 2 Preferred household Housing and Option District projections1 Planning Research2 22.4% 24.2% 15.6% Oswestry Borough 23.4% 20.4% 23.7% North Shropshire District Shrewsbury & Atcham 23.4% 24.2% 31.9% Borough 18.3% 20.4% 19.1% South Shropshire District 12.5% 10.9% 9.7% Bridgnorth District 100% 100% 100% Total
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Table 5: Percentage growth in households in Shropshire 2006-2026 converted to spatial zone using conversion in table 2. Past Cambridge RSS Phase 2006 Centre for development subnational 2 Preferred trends Housing and Option household Planning Spatial zone extrapolated projections1 Research2 to 2026 28% 30% 20% 23.9% NW 19% 17% 20% 20.2% NE 23% 24% 32% 25.0% Central 19% 21% 20% 19.7% South 11.2% 12% 10% 9% East
Figure 3: Graph of table 5 Estimates of household growth 35.0% Past development trends extrapolated to 2026
% Shropshire's growth
30.0% 25.0%
2006 subnational population projections1
20.0% 15.0%
Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research2 RSS Phase 2 Preferred Option
10.0% 5.0% 0.0%
NW
NE
Central
South
East
spatial zone
Core Strategy policy CS1 Although the RSS Phase 2 Preferred Option is the starting point for the spatial distribution in Shropshire, Core Strategy policy CS1 adjusts them higher or lower, to reflect the other three estimates of household growth. The resulting policy CS1 is set out in Table 6 below, with an explanation of why the figures are higher or lower than RSS Phase 2 requirements.
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Table 6a: Core Strategy Policy CS1 : Residential Residential MidRSS Spatial range Range District zone (no. Target Targets dwellings) as % as % Shropshire
27,500
100%
100%
NW
5,775 – 6,325
22%
11%
NE
5,500 – 6,050
21%
31%
Central
8,250 – 8,800
31%
39%
South
3,575 – 4,125
14%
11%
East
3,025 – 3,850 plus up to 1,000 for military needs if required
12%
8%
Table 6b: Core Strategy Policy CS1 : Employment MidRSS Employment Spatial Range District range zone Target Targets (hectares) as % as % Shropshire
290
100%
100%
NW
55 - 65
21%
11%
NE Central
50 - 60 95 - 105
19% 34%
31% 39%
South
35 - 45
14%
11%
East
30 - 40
12%
8%
Comparison with RSS Phase 2 requirements Overall Increase from 25,700 dwellings on EiP Panel recommendation Higher proportion reflects rural rebalance in enlarged zone Lower proportion reflects reduced zone Lower proportion allows for rural rebalance but still supports role of Shrewsbury Higher proportion reflects rural rebalance in enlarged zone Higher proportion reflects rural rebalance
Comparison with RSS Phase 2 requirements Overall increase from 216 hectares on EiP Panel recommendation enlarged zone and facilitating rural growth reduced zone facilitating rural growth enlarged zone and facilitating rural growth reduced zone but facilitating rural growth
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Part 2: SETTLEMENT STRATEGY ANALYSIS OF DEVELOPMENT TRENDS OVER 1998-2008 The conclusion drawn from this assessment is that the current settlement strategy has been effective in focusing development in main towns and main service villages, but it has enabled significant development in the countryside. The middle hierarchy, namely local service villages, has not experienced much development over the past ten years. Employment development has been affected in certain main towns (i.e. Ludlow, Bridgnorth and Oswestry) by the limited availability of readily available land for development. In Bridgnorth and Oswestry this has resulted in development in the countryside but Ludlow was supported by development in the main service villages. 1998-2008 employment development (hectares)
1998-2008 housing development (number new dwellings)
55.0
4,000
45.0
Tier g: open countryside
40.0
Tier f: within 400m of settlements
35.0
Tier e: other settlements
30.0
Tier d: limited development Tier c: local service villages
25.0 20.0 15.0
Tier b: main service villages
10.0
3,500
Tier g: open countryside
3,000
no. dwellings over 10 yrs
hectares class B employment
50.0
Tier f: within 400m of settlements
2,500
Tier e: other settlements
2,000
Tier d: limited development
1,500
Tier c: local service villages
1,000
Tier b: main service villages Tier a: main towns
Tier a: main towns
500
5.0 0.0
0
NSDC
OBC
SABC SSDC
NSDC
BDC
-9-
OBC
SABC SSDC
BDC
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper Source: completions data (PLUMS data) – figures in appendix 2
Source: completions data (PLUMS data) – figures in appendix 2
1998-2008 development by settlement type - proportions 100% 90%
Tier g: open countryside
80%
Tier f: within 400m of settlements Tier e: other settlements
60% 50%
Tier d: limited development
40%
Tier c: local service villages
30%
Tier b: main service villages
20%
Tier a: main towns
10%
- 10 -
Shropshire residential
Shropshire employment
BDC residential
BDC employment
SSDC residential
SSDC employment
SABC residential
SABC employment
OBC residential
OBC employment
NSDC residential
0%
NSDC employment
proportion of total
70%
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper See appendix 3 for figures
To enable analysis, the different settlement hierarchies of the five former districts’ Local Plans have been standardised into tiers. The settlements in each tier are detailed in Appendix 1. The different policies that relate to each tier are summarised in Appendix 2. The actual number of completions that occurred over 1998-2008 are given in Appendix 3, and summarised in the graphs. The graphs illustrate that around half of residential development in the past decade has been in the main towns, albeit with spatial variation – more than half in the Central area, and significantly less than half in the Southern area. Main service villages have played an important role, while local service villages have been relatively insignificant. Employment has followed a similar pattern with exactly half of all development located in the main towns but with the majority of this development taking place within Shrewsbury but also in the market towns of North Shropshire. As previously identified Ludlow, Bridgorth and to a lesser extent Oswestry have each under performed due to land availability constraints but conversely some of these towns still have significant employment land commitments. Small scale employment development has also occurred in main service villages although in South Shropshire the under performance of Ludlow as the main town has been complemented by more significant development in the main service villages. A significance amount of development has occurred in settlements not referred to in the Local Plans, outside settlements and in the open countryside (tiers e, f & g), accounting for over 25% of residential development and over 35% of employment development over the past ten years. Employment development in the countryside has accounted for nearly all the employment development outside the main centres. This has comprised development in smaller settlements and the continuing growth and consolidation of the traditional network of rural employment sites often reflecting the influence of previous military activity in Shropshire. Barn conversions accounted for 9% of all residential development in Shropshire over 1998-2008. The bulk of development outside settlements in the former Bridgnorth District, Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough and Oswestry Borough was comprised of barn conversions. However, in the former North Shropshire District and South Shropshire District barn conversions accounted for a less dominant percentage of development in the countryside.
Appendices 1. Current Local Plan settlement hierarchies, and the settlements included in each 2. Current Local Plan policies (summary) assigned to standardised tiers 3. Figures underlying the graphs
- 11 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Appendix 1 Current Local Plan settlement hierarchies (standardised) Tier Tier a Tier b
Tier c
Tier d
Standardised Main towns categories
Main service village
Local service village (small scale development)
Limited development (conversions or 1-2 dwellings)
North Shropshire District Local Plan
Ellesmere, Market Drayton, Wem, Whitchurch
Baschurch, Cheswardine, Clive, Cockshutt, Dudleston Heath, Hadnallo, Hinstock, Hodnet, Prees, Shawbury, Tilstock, Welshampton, Woore
Oswestry Borough Local Plan
Oswestry, incl. Morda
Adderley, Ash Magna, Calverhall, Childs Ercall, Grinshill, Harmer Hill, Ightfield, Loppington, Moreton Saye, Myddle, Norton in Hales, Stanton upon Hine Heath, Weston Under Redcastle, Westoncommon, Wollerton Chirk Bank, Knockin, Maesbury Marsh, Park Hall, Rhoswiel, Treflach
Bagley, Bletchley, Burlton, Chipnall, Eaton upon Tern, Heathcote, Hollinwood, Lee Brockhurst, Longford, Lower Hordley, Lyneal, Marchamley, Moreton Corbet, Newtown, Northwood, Pipe Gate, Platt Lane, Prees Higher Heath, Preston Brockhurst, Soudley, Stoke on Tern, Tetchill, Tilley, Welsh Frankton, Weston Lullingfields, Whixall, Wistanswick, Woodseaves Babbinswood, Dovaston, Maesbrook, Porthywaen, Selattyn, St. Martins Moor
-
(as per 2005 services study) Acton Burnell, Bicton, Buildwas, Church Preen, Forton Heath, Grafton, Leaton, Leebotwood, Longnor, Montford Bridge,Nescliffe, Upton Magna, Wattlesborough, Wroxter, Yockleton
Bucknell, Clee Hill, Clun
-
-
Alverley, Beckbury, Brockton, Chelmarsh, Cleobury North, Ditton Priors, Eardington, Farlow, Morville, Kinlet, Oreton, Sheriffhales, Stottesdon, Worfield
Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough Local Plan
South Shropshire District Local Plan Bridgnorth Shropshire District Local Plan
Gobowen, Kinnerley, Llanymynech, Pant, Ruyton XI Towns, St. Martins, Trefonen, West Felton, Weston Ryn, Whittington Shrewsbury Bayston Hill, Bowmere Heath, Condover, Cressage, Cross Houses, Dorrington, Ford, Hanwood/ Hanwood Bank, Longden, Minsterley, Pontesbury, Westbury Craven Church Stretton, Ludlow, Arms Bishop’s Castle, Burford, Cleobury Mortimer Bridgnorth, Shifnal
Albrighton, Broseley, Highley, Much Wenlock
Note: These policies did not apply for the ten year period: they reflect Local Plans adopted at different times, some as recently as 2005. - 12 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Tier e: Other settlements North Shropshire District Oswestry Borough Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough
South Shropshire District
Bridgnorth Shropshire District
Faulsgreen, Stanley Green Bronygarth/Castle Mill, Crickheath, Grimpo, Maesbury, Middleton/Aston Square, Morton/Morton Common, Nantmawr, Queens Head, Rednal, Sweeney Mountain/Nant-Y-Caws, The Wern, Upper Hengoed, Whixall, Woolston, Wykey Alberbury, Arscott, Asterley, Astley, Atcham, Berrington, Cardington/Gretton, Castle Pulverbatch, Church Pulverbatch, Cound/Upper Cound, Cruckmeole, Cruckton, Eaton Constantine, Edge, Enchmarsh, Exfords Green, Fitz, Ford Heath, Frodesley, Garmston, Habberley, Halston/Plealey Road, Harley, Hookagate, Hughley, Kenley, Kinton, Lea Cross, Leighton, Little Ness, Montford, Picklescott, Pitchford, Plaish, Plealey, Ploxgreen, Pontesbury Hill, Preston, Preston Gubbals, Rushton, Ryton, Sheinton, Shepherds Lane/Calcott, Shrawardine, Stapleton, Stoney Stretton, Uffington, Vennington, Vron Gate, Walford Heath/Oldwood, Withington, Wollaston, Woolstaston, Wrentnall, Wroxeter Angel Bank/Farden, Ashford Bowdler, Ashford Carbonell, Aston Munslow, Aston Pigott, Aston Rogers, Aston-On-Clun, Beambridge/Aston Mill, Bedlam, Bedstone, Bentlawnt, Besom Woods/Wheathill, Bitterley, Bouldon, Bromfield, Broome, Catherton Common, Caynham, Chapel Lawn, Cheney Longville, Chirbury, Clee St Margaret, Clunbury, Clungunford, Clunton, Cockshutford, Colebatch, Corfton/Corfton Bache, Crowsnest, Culmington, Dhustone, Diddlebury, Doddington, Edgton/Basford, Felhampton, Greete, Hatton, Haytons Bent/Up Lo Hayton, Hints, Holdgate, Hope, Hope Bagot, Hope Bowdler, Hopesay, Hopton Bank, Hopton Castle, Hungerford/Broadstone, Knowbury, Little Stretton, Llanfair Waterdine, Long Meadow End, Longville In The Dale, Lydbury North, Lydham, Marton, Meadowtown, Middlehope, Middleton, Milson, More, Munslow, Nash, Neen Sollars, Newcastle, Obley, Onibury, Overton, Pennerley/The Bog, Priest Weston, Ratlinghope, Rushbury/Roman Bank, Shelve, Snailbeach, Stiperstones/Perkins Beach, Stoke St Milborough, Stokesay, Strefford, The Sheet, Ticklerton, Wall Under Heywood, Wallbank, Wentnor, Westhope, Whitcot, Whitcot Keysett, Whittingslow, Whitton, Whittytree/Duxmoor, Wistanstow, Woofferton, Woolston, Worthen/Brockton Acton Round, Astley Abbots, Aston Eyre, Badger, Billingsley, Boningale, Bourton, Burwarton, Button Oak, Chesterton, Chetton, Chorley, Colemore Green, Cross Lane Head, Easthope, Farley, Hampton Loade, Heath Hill, Heathton, Hilton, Homer, Jackfield, Kemberton, Middleton Priors, Monkhopton, Muckley Cross, Neenton, Nordley, Norton, Quatford, Quatt, Romsley, Ryton, Shipley, Sidbury, Stanmore Camp, Stanton Long, Sutton, The Hobbins, Tong, Tuckhill, Upton Cressett, Weston, Oldbury,
These settlements are not named in any Local Plans
- 13 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Appendix 2: Current Local Plan policies (summary) assigned to standardised tiers Tier Tier a Tier b Tier c Standardised Main towns categories North Shropshire District Local Plan
Policy G1 “…the majority of new development in the District will be located within or on the edges of the 4 Market Towns…”
Oswestry Borough Local Plan
Policy H5 & table 3.2 “The majority of the 2400 new dwellings required in the Borough between 1993 and 2006 will be located in the following larger settlements : Oswestry Town incl Morda, Gobowen, Kinnerley, Llanymynech, Pant, Ruyton XI Towns, St.Martins, Trefonen, West Felton, Weston Rhyn, Whittington” Para 1.32-1.34 “…In line with the sustainable outlook on future development, and the strategy set out in the Structure Plan, development is concentrated within Shrewsbury.
Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough Local Plan
South Shropshire
Policy SDS3 “…Craven Arms will be the principal centre for
Tier d
Main service village
Local service village (small scale development)
Limited development (conversions or 1-2 dwellings)
Policy G1 “…In the rural settlements of the District limited development will be encouraged where it meets local needs or can provide support for existing services and contribute to the wellbeing and economic vitality of communities. The principal focus of rural development will be the Main Service Villages…” Policy H5 & table 3.2 “The majority of the 2400 new dwellings required in the Borough between 1993 and 2006 will be located in the following larger settlements : Oswestry Town incl Morda, Gobowen, Kinnerley, Llanymynech, Pant, Ruyton XI Towns, St.Martins, Trefonen, West Felton, Weston Rhyn, Whittington”
Policy G1 “Some development may also be permitted in Local Service Villages, commensurate with the smaller scale of these settlements.”
Policy G1 “In settlements listed as ‘Other Villages’ new development will generally be limited to the sympathetic conversion of suitable buildings within or adjacent to settlements, together with proposals which support well conceived schemes of rural diversification”
Policy H6 “The following settlements are suitable for a limited scale of housing development:”
Policy H7 “Infill developments of one or two dwellings and, exceptionally, small groups of dwellings, will be allowed on suitable sites within the development boundaries of the following settlements :”
Policies HS3 & EM3 “…Development in the rural area will be restricted to those larger settlements containing a sustainable range of facilities and services and these have development boundaries within which development opportunities may exist…” Policy SDS3 “…Bishop’s Castle, Burford, Church Stretton, Cleobury
No equivalent policy
Policies HS4 & EM3 “…A second tier of villages includes those that do not have development boundaries, but which are considered eligible to have small scale development of one or two dwellings by virtue of having a reasonable range of services…”
- 14 -
Policy SDS3 “…Within the settlements of Bucknell,
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper District Local Plan
growth…”
Mortimer and Ludlow will provide opportunities for more limited growth…”
Bridgnorth Shropshire District Local Plan
Policy H3 Principal towns Bridgnorth, Shifnal
Policy H3 Key settlements Albrighton, Broseley, Highley, Much Wenlock
Clee Hill and Clun infill housing development will be permitted within the settlement boundaries shown on the inset maps, of a scale which is in keeping with the character of the settlement…” No equivalent policy
Policy H4 “…only residential development in accordance with policies H11, H12, H14 & RD2…”
Note: These policies did not apply for the ten year period: they reflect Local Plans adopted at different times, some as recently as 2005.
- 15 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Appendix 3 These figures are displayed in the three graphs in the main text. 1998-2008 Employment Development Completions (hectares) Tier a: main Tier b: main Tier c: local Tier d: limited towns service service development villages villages
Tier e: other settlements
NSDC 18.029 0.268 0.000 0.886 0.433 OBC 6.020 0.439 0.015 0.013 0.375 SABC 37.929 1.073 0.000 0.967 2.951 SSDC 1.773 8.221 0.049 0.000 5.050 BDC 3.526 0.582 0.000 0.752 2.804 Shropshire 67.277 10.583 0.064 2.618 11.613 Source: PLUMS completions (of planning permissions) data, Shropshire Council
Tier f: within 400m of settlements 6.419 5.288 3.478 1.056 0.295 16.536
Tier g: open countryside
8.619 2.185 3.734 3.452 5.610 23.600
total
34.654 14.335 50.132 19.601 13.569 132.291
1998-2008 Housing development completions (no. dwellings) Tier a Tier b Tier c Tier d Tier e Tier f Tier g total Main towns Main service Local service Limited Other Within 400m Open villages villages (small development settlements of settlements countryside scale development) NSDC 1,720 545 148 124 12 162 766 3,477 OBC 1,146 677 86 41 51 36 122 2,159 SABC 2,171 346 0 92 205 66 313 3,193 SSDC 215 1,301 86 0 409 118 370 2,499 BDC 489 355 0 104 171 42 297 1,458 Shropshire 5,741 3,224 320 361 848 424 1,868 12,786 Source: PLUMS completions (of planning permissions) data, Shropshire Council
- 16 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Barn Conversions No. barn % of total 1998-2008 conversions completions NSDC 264 7.6% OBC 96 4.4% SABC 274 8.6% SSDC 218 8.7% BDC 299 20.5% Shropshire 1151 9.0% SOURCE: Development trends reports 2008
1998-2008 Development by settlement type - proportions Tier e: Tier a: Tier b: Tier c: Tier d: main main local limited other towns service service development settlements villages villages NSDC employment 52.0% 0.8% 0.0% 2.6% 1.2% NSDC residential 49.5% 15.7% 4.3% 3.6% 0.3% OBC employment 42.0% 3.1% 0.1% 0.1% 2.6% OBC residential 53.1% 31.4% 4.0% 1.9% 2.4% SABC employment 75.7% 2.1% 0.0% 1.9% 5.9% SABC residential 68.0% 10.8% 0.0% 2.9% 6.4% SSDC employment 9.0% 41.9% 0.2% 0.0% 25.8% SSDC residential 8.6% 52.1% 3.4% 0.0% 16.4% BDC employment 26.0% 4.3% 0.0% 5.5% 20.7% BDC residential 33.5% 24.3% 0.0% 7.1% 11.7% Shropshire employment 50.9% 8.0% 0.0% 2.0% 8.8% Shropshire residential 44.9% 25.2% 2.5% 2.8% 6.6%
- 17 -
Tier f: Tier g: total within open 400m of countryside settlements 18.5% 24.9% 100.0% 4.7% 22.0% 100.0% 36.9% 15.2% 100.0% 1.7% 5.7% 100.0% 6.9% 7.4% 100.0% 2.1% 9.8% 100.0% 5.4% 17.6% 100.0% 4.7% 14.8% 100.0% 2.2% 41.3% 100.0% 2.9% 20.4% 100.0% 12.5% 17.8% 100.0% 3.3% 14.6% 100.0%
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Part 3: MARKET TOWN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Table 7: Past trends, land availability and indicative level of development (dwellings) Past average annual rate 1998-2008 (dwellings per year) 1. Sub-regional centre Shrewsbury
217.1
Past rate x 20 years continuing past trends Completions 2006-2026 2006-09
Permissions April 09
Unused Allocations April 09
SHLAA sites within development boundaries
Total land availability
4342
624
1454
260
1480
3818
Notes
CS3 indicative range
RSS requirement
2. Market towns & key centres North West spatial zone Oswestry
94.6
1892
423
256
5
490
1174
>1,000
Ellesmere
19.3
386
56
424
0
188
668
500-1,000
North East spatial zone Whitchurch
55.1
1102
110
191
371
35
707
Market Drayton
76.6
1532
210
221
45
74
550
Wem
21.0
420
83
245
0
66
394
4.9
98
15
4
0
32
51
past trends and vision suggest >1,000 past trends and vision suggest >1,000 vision suggests more than past trends
>1,000
>1,000
500-1,000
Central spatial zone Minsterley
- 18 -
vision suggests more than
200-500
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Pontesbury South spatial zone Ludlow Craven Arms Church Stretton Bishops Castle Cleobury Mortimer East spatial zone Bridgnorth
Shifnal
Much Wenlock Broseley Highley
Albrighton*
past trends vision suggests more than past trends
5.2
104
30
16
0
71.4
1428
145
239
0
84
468
21.5
430
60
44
80
35
219
200-500
20.4
408
36
36
0
37
109
200-500
13.0
260
19
29
0
37
85
200-500
15.0
300
104
62
0
26
192
200-500
28.4
568
130
509
0
0
639
500-1,000
46
land constraints
may be needed to meet military requirement
200-500
500-1,000
20.5
410
121
93
190
51
455
10.3
206
9
33
0
77
119
200-500
7.2
144
21
58
90
6
175
200-500
8.9
178
72
18
51
7
148
200-500
9.1
182
12
24
- 19 -
80
40
156
may be needed to meet military requirement
500-1,000
200-500
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Part 4: SPATIAL ZONE EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT Table 8: Past trends, land availability and indicative level of development (hectares) Past average annual rate 1998-2008 (hectares per year)
Past rate x 20 years continuing past trends for 2006-2026
Completions 2006-09
Permissions April 09
Unused Allocations April 09
Committed Employment Land
Notes on requirements for new land
CS1 indicative range
76
12.2
23.6
14
50
Provision within strategic locations
90
1. Sub-regional centre 3.8
Shrewsbury
2. Market towns & key centres North West spatial zone Oswestry
0.6
12
1.4
2.1
18.2
21.7
Ellesmere
0.16
3.2
1.0
0.8
7.0
8.8
Spatial Zone
1.59
31.8
4.3
8.5
28.3
41
land availability constraints limiting role of Oswestry satisfy new employment needs -
55 - 65
North East spatial zone Whitchurch
1.1
22
3.4
4.0
10.7
18
Market Drayton
0.47
9.4
1.2
0.8
19
21
Wem
0.04
0.8
0.1
0.12
2.1
2.3
Spatial Zone
3.3
66
9.3
11.3
34.6
55.2
- 20 -
satisfy local employer needs satisfy local employer needs satisfy new employment needs significant commitments fall within target range
50 - 60
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Central spatial zone Minsterley
0.04
0.8
-
0.5
-
0.5
satisfy local employer needs
Pontesbury
-
-
-
-
-
-
satisfy local employment needs
Spatial Zone
1.22
24.4
1.9
12.4
-
14.3
significant commitments fall within target range
Ludlow
0.24
4.8
1.0
1.4
1.0
3.4
Craven Arms
0.18
3.6
0.8
3.0
3.4
7.2
Church Stretton
0.01
0.2
-
0.08
-
0.08
Bishops Castle
0.39
7.8
-
2.5
-
2.5
Cleobury Mortimer
0.004
0.08
-
0.12
-
0.12
Spatial Zone
1.96
39.2
3.7
10.0
5.8
19.5
Bridgnorth
0.37
7.4
0.43
8.0
3.1
11.5
Shifnal
0.006
0.12
-
0.2
-
0.2
Much Wenlock
0.024
0.48
-
-
1.6
1.6
Broseley
0.027
0.54
-
-
-
-
5 - 15
South spatial zone satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs -
East spatial zone
- 21 -
land availability constraints limiting role of Bridgnorth satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs
35 – 45
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Highley
0.001
0.02
-
-
0.6
0.6
Albrighton
0.006
0.12
-
-
-
-
Spatial Zone
1.36
27.2
5.0
10.5
6.3
21.8
- 22 -
satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs -
30 - 40
DEVELOPMENT, DEMOGRAPHIC AND ECONOMIC TRENDS 1998-2008 Analysis of Trends to support the Core Strategy Publication 15 February 2010
TECHNICAL PAPER
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Introduction This paper outlines some of the considerations that have informed the draft Core Strategy, and in particular the following three areas: 1. Spatial split of development across the five spatial zones in Shropshire (Core Strategy policy CS1 and CS2) 2. The Settlement Strategy, or spread of development between the subregional centre, market towns and other key centres, and the rural area (Core Strategy policies CS1, CS4, CS5 and CS14) 3. Market Town level of development (Core Strategy policy CS3)
Part 1 SPATIAL SPLIT Spatial zones in relation to district boundaries The Core Strategy identifies five spatial zones within Shropshire, as shown in figure 1 overleaf. These deliberately overlap, to reflect functional relationships across the former district authority boundaries. However, for the purpose of analysing trends, it is necessary to use data for the former districts to avoid double-counting any data. To do this, we have actually used the new administrative boundaries for the local joint committee areas put in place by the Unitary Shropshire Council. These are shown in figure 2 and are related to the former district boundaries which are outlined in black. Table 1: composition of spatial zones Comprised of Core Strategy Local Joint Spatial zone Committee Areas North West
1, 2, 6, 7, 8
North East
3, 4, 5
Central Shrewsbury
Comparison with former district boundaries Larger than Oswestry Borough it now contains Ellesmere (LJC2) and LJC7, part of which was formerly in North Shropshire Smaller than North Shropshire District having lost LJC2 and part LJC7
9, 10, 16 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 27, 28
South
19, 20, 24, 25, 26
East
17, 18, 21, 22, 23
Identical to Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough Larger than South Shropshire District it now contains part of LJC26 formerly in Bridgnorth District Smaller than Bridgnorth District it has lost part of LJC26 to the South zone
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Figure 1:
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Figure 2: Local Joint Committee areas and former district boundaries
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Converting district statistics into spatial zones To inform the Core Strategy, we have represented district level statistics into the new spatial zones using the Local Joint Committee areas. This changes the proportional distribution of the population as shown in Table 2. Table 2: Conversion from district data to spatial zone data Estimated Proportional Estimated Population Distribution Population Spatial District of District between of spatial zone 2007 Districts zone 2007 Oswestry 40,308 NW 50,453 14% Borough North Shropshire 60,099 NE 49,999 21% District Shrewsbury & Atcham 95,998 Central 96,275 33% Borough South Shropshire 42,709 South 44,889 14% District Bridgnorth 51,939 East 49,437 18% District Shropshire
291,053
100%
Shropshire
291,053
Proportional Distribution between Zone 18% 17%
33%
15% 17% 100%
As the map in Figure 2 above illustrates: • the Central spatial zone is geographically identical to the former Shrewsbury and Atcham Borough area, although population estimates are slightly different due to rounding in the underlying calculations; • the North West spatial zone is more extensive than the former Oswestry Borough Council area, and conversely the North East spatial zone is smaller than the former North Shropshire District area; • the South spatial zone is larger than the former South Shropshire District area, containing all of Local Joint Committee area 26 and the East spatial zone is smaller than the former Bridgnorth District Council area. Estimates of household growth in Shropshire Three external sources give different estimates of household growth in Shropshire, as shown in Table 3 below. The proportionate split between the districts is shown in table 4 and this has been represented to give the proportionate split between the spatial zones in Table 5 to inform the Core Strategy. District-level household figures have been converted into spatial zones using the following conversion factors derived from the population changes from the districts into the spatial zones: Oswestry Borough (125.2%), North Shropshire District (83.2%), Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough (100.3%), South Shropshire District (105.1%) and Bridgnorth District (95.2%).
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
In addition, the Council’s in-house PLUMS monitoring database of completions has been assigned to the spatial zones (using the Local Joint Committee areas in Table 2) and the results are also shown in Table 5. The extrapolation to 2026 is based on actual completions 1998-2008, converted to an average annual rate, and multiplied by 20 years for the period from 2006 to 2026. Table 3: Estimated Growth in households in Shropshire 2006-2026 2006 Cambridge RSS Phase Centre for subnational 2 Preferred Housing and Option household Planning District projections Research1 Oswestry Borough 6,618 6,900 4,000 North Shropshire District 6,888 5,800 6,100 Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough 6,886 6,900 8,200 South Shropshire District 5,399 5,800 4,900 Bridgnorth District 3,697 3,100 2,500 total 29,488 28,500 25,7002 1 2
used by WMRA at RSS Phase 2 examination May 2009 The Panel Report, following the RSS Phase 2 examination, increased Shropshire’s allocation by 1,900 homes but did not suggest how they should be distributed. The new allocation for Shropshire is 27,500.
Table 4: Percentage growth in households in Shropshire 2006-2026 2006 Cambridge RSS Phase subnational Centre for 2 Preferred household Housing and Option District projections1 Planning Research2 22.4% 24.2% 15.6% Oswestry Borough 23.4% 20.4% 23.7% North Shropshire District Shrewsbury & Atcham 23.4% 24.2% 31.9% Borough 18.3% 20.4% 19.1% South Shropshire District 12.5% 10.9% 9.7% Bridgnorth District 100% 100% 100% Total
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Table 5: Percentage growth in households in Shropshire 2006-2026 converted to spatial zone using conversion in table 2. Past Cambridge RSS Phase 2006 Centre for development subnational 2 Preferred trends Housing and Option household Planning Spatial zone extrapolated projections1 Research2 to 2026 28% 30% 20% 23.9% NW 19% 17% 20% 20.2% NE 23% 24% 32% 25.0% Central 19% 21% 20% 19.7% South 11.2% 12% 10% 9% East
Figure 3: Graph of table 5 Estimates of household growth 35.0% Past development trends extrapolated to 2026
% Shropshire's growth
30.0% 25.0%
2006 subnational population projections1
20.0% 15.0%
Cambridge Centre for Housing and Planning Research2 RSS Phase 2 Preferred Option
10.0% 5.0% 0.0%
NW
NE
Central
South
East
spatial zone
Core Strategy policy CS1 Although the RSS Phase 2 Preferred Option is the starting point for the spatial distribution in Shropshire, Core Strategy policy CS1 adjusts them higher or lower, to reflect the other three estimates of household growth. The resulting policy CS1 is set out in Table 6 below, with an explanation of why the figures are higher or lower than RSS Phase 2 requirements.
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Table 6a: Core Strategy Policy CS1 : Residential Residential MidRSS Spatial range Range District zone (no. Target Targets dwellings) as % as % Shropshire
27,500
100%
100%
NW
5,775 – 6,325
22%
11%
NE
5,500 – 6,050
21%
31%
Central
8,250 – 8,800
31%
39%
South
3,575 – 4,125
14%
11%
East
3,025 – 3,850 plus up to 1,000 for military needs if required
12%
8%
Table 6b: Core Strategy Policy CS1 : Employment MidRSS Employment Spatial Range District range zone Target Targets (hectares) as % as % Shropshire
290
100%
100%
NW
55 - 65
21%
11%
NE Central
50 - 60 95 - 105
19% 34%
31% 39%
South
35 - 45
14%
11%
East
30 - 40
12%
8%
Comparison with RSS Phase 2 requirements Overall Increase from 25,700 dwellings on EiP Panel recommendation Higher proportion reflects rural rebalance in enlarged zone Lower proportion reflects reduced zone Lower proportion allows for rural rebalance but still supports role of Shrewsbury Higher proportion reflects rural rebalance in enlarged zone Higher proportion reflects rural rebalance
Comparison with RSS Phase 2 requirements Overall increase from 216 hectares on EiP Panel recommendation enlarged zone and facilitating rural growth reduced zone facilitating rural growth enlarged zone and facilitating rural growth reduced zone but facilitating rural growth
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Part 2: SETTLEMENT STRATEGY ANALYSIS OF DEVELOPMENT TRENDS OVER 1998-2008 The conclusion drawn from this assessment is that the current settlement strategy has been effective in focusing development in main towns and main service villages, but it has enabled significant development in the countryside. The middle hierarchy, namely local service villages, has not experienced much development over the past ten years. Employment development has been affected in certain main towns (i.e. Ludlow, Bridgnorth and Oswestry) by the limited availability of readily available land for development. In Bridgnorth and Oswestry this has resulted in development in the countryside but Ludlow was supported by development in the main service villages. 1998-2008 employment development (hectares)
1998-2008 housing development (number new dwellings)
55.0
4,000
45.0
Tier g: open countryside
40.0
Tier f: within 400m of settlements
35.0
Tier e: other settlements
30.0
Tier d: limited development Tier c: local service villages
25.0 20.0 15.0
Tier b: main service villages
10.0
3,500
Tier g: open countryside
3,000
no. dwellings over 10 yrs
hectares class B employment
50.0
Tier f: within 400m of settlements
2,500
Tier e: other settlements
2,000
Tier d: limited development
1,500
Tier c: local service villages
1,000
Tier b: main service villages Tier a: main towns
Tier a: main towns
500
5.0 0.0
0
NSDC
OBC
SABC SSDC
NSDC
BDC
-9-
OBC
SABC SSDC
BDC
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper Source: completions data (PLUMS data) – figures in appendix 2
Source: completions data (PLUMS data) – figures in appendix 2
1998-2008 development by settlement type - proportions 100% 90%
Tier g: open countryside
80%
Tier f: within 400m of settlements Tier e: other settlements
60% 50%
Tier d: limited development
40%
Tier c: local service villages
30%
Tier b: main service villages
20%
Tier a: main towns
10%
- 10 -
Shropshire residential
Shropshire employment
BDC residential
BDC employment
SSDC residential
SSDC employment
SABC residential
SABC employment
OBC residential
OBC employment
NSDC residential
0%
NSDC employment
proportion of total
70%
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper See appendix 3 for figures
To enable analysis, the different settlement hierarchies of the five former districts’ Local Plans have been standardised into tiers. The settlements in each tier are detailed in Appendix 1. The different policies that relate to each tier are summarised in Appendix 2. The actual number of completions that occurred over 1998-2008 are given in Appendix 3, and summarised in the graphs. The graphs illustrate that around half of residential development in the past decade has been in the main towns, albeit with spatial variation – more than half in the Central area, and significantly less than half in the Southern area. Main service villages have played an important role, while local service villages have been relatively insignificant. Employment has followed a similar pattern with exactly half of all development located in the main towns but with the majority of this development taking place within Shrewsbury but also in the market towns of North Shropshire. As previously identified Ludlow, Bridgorth and to a lesser extent Oswestry have each under performed due to land availability constraints but conversely some of these towns still have significant employment land commitments. Small scale employment development has also occurred in main service villages although in South Shropshire the under performance of Ludlow as the main town has been complemented by more significant development in the main service villages. A significance amount of development has occurred in settlements not referred to in the Local Plans, outside settlements and in the open countryside (tiers e, f & g), accounting for over 25% of residential development and over 35% of employment development over the past ten years. Employment development in the countryside has accounted for nearly all the employment development outside the main centres. This has comprised development in smaller settlements and the continuing growth and consolidation of the traditional network of rural employment sites often reflecting the influence of previous military activity in Shropshire. Barn conversions accounted for 9% of all residential development in Shropshire over 1998-2008. The bulk of development outside settlements in the former Bridgnorth District, Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough and Oswestry Borough was comprised of barn conversions. However, in the former North Shropshire District and South Shropshire District barn conversions accounted for a less dominant percentage of development in the countryside.
Appendices 1. Current Local Plan settlement hierarchies, and the settlements included in each 2. Current Local Plan policies (summary) assigned to standardised tiers 3. Figures underlying the graphs
- 11 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Appendix 1 Current Local Plan settlement hierarchies (standardised) Tier Tier a Tier b
Tier c
Tier d
Standardised Main towns categories
Main service village
Local service village (small scale development)
Limited development (conversions or 1-2 dwellings)
North Shropshire District Local Plan
Ellesmere, Market Drayton, Wem, Whitchurch
Baschurch, Cheswardine, Clive, Cockshutt, Dudleston Heath, Hadnallo, Hinstock, Hodnet, Prees, Shawbury, Tilstock, Welshampton, Woore
Oswestry Borough Local Plan
Oswestry, incl. Morda
Adderley, Ash Magna, Calverhall, Childs Ercall, Grinshill, Harmer Hill, Ightfield, Loppington, Moreton Saye, Myddle, Norton in Hales, Stanton upon Hine Heath, Weston Under Redcastle, Westoncommon, Wollerton Chirk Bank, Knockin, Maesbury Marsh, Park Hall, Rhoswiel, Treflach
Bagley, Bletchley, Burlton, Chipnall, Eaton upon Tern, Heathcote, Hollinwood, Lee Brockhurst, Longford, Lower Hordley, Lyneal, Marchamley, Moreton Corbet, Newtown, Northwood, Pipe Gate, Platt Lane, Prees Higher Heath, Preston Brockhurst, Soudley, Stoke on Tern, Tetchill, Tilley, Welsh Frankton, Weston Lullingfields, Whixall, Wistanswick, Woodseaves Babbinswood, Dovaston, Maesbrook, Porthywaen, Selattyn, St. Martins Moor
-
(as per 2005 services study) Acton Burnell, Bicton, Buildwas, Church Preen, Forton Heath, Grafton, Leaton, Leebotwood, Longnor, Montford Bridge,Nescliffe, Upton Magna, Wattlesborough, Wroxter, Yockleton
Bucknell, Clee Hill, Clun
-
-
Alverley, Beckbury, Brockton, Chelmarsh, Cleobury North, Ditton Priors, Eardington, Farlow, Morville, Kinlet, Oreton, Sheriffhales, Stottesdon, Worfield
Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough Local Plan
South Shropshire District Local Plan Bridgnorth Shropshire District Local Plan
Gobowen, Kinnerley, Llanymynech, Pant, Ruyton XI Towns, St. Martins, Trefonen, West Felton, Weston Ryn, Whittington Shrewsbury Bayston Hill, Bowmere Heath, Condover, Cressage, Cross Houses, Dorrington, Ford, Hanwood/ Hanwood Bank, Longden, Minsterley, Pontesbury, Westbury Craven Church Stretton, Ludlow, Arms Bishop’s Castle, Burford, Cleobury Mortimer Bridgnorth, Shifnal
Albrighton, Broseley, Highley, Much Wenlock
Note: These policies did not apply for the ten year period: they reflect Local Plans adopted at different times, some as recently as 2005. - 12 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Tier e: Other settlements North Shropshire District Oswestry Borough Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough
South Shropshire District
Bridgnorth Shropshire District
Faulsgreen, Stanley Green Bronygarth/Castle Mill, Crickheath, Grimpo, Maesbury, Middleton/Aston Square, Morton/Morton Common, Nantmawr, Queens Head, Rednal, Sweeney Mountain/Nant-Y-Caws, The Wern, Upper Hengoed, Whixall, Woolston, Wykey Alberbury, Arscott, Asterley, Astley, Atcham, Berrington, Cardington/Gretton, Castle Pulverbatch, Church Pulverbatch, Cound/Upper Cound, Cruckmeole, Cruckton, Eaton Constantine, Edge, Enchmarsh, Exfords Green, Fitz, Ford Heath, Frodesley, Garmston, Habberley, Halston/Plealey Road, Harley, Hookagate, Hughley, Kenley, Kinton, Lea Cross, Leighton, Little Ness, Montford, Picklescott, Pitchford, Plaish, Plealey, Ploxgreen, Pontesbury Hill, Preston, Preston Gubbals, Rushton, Ryton, Sheinton, Shepherds Lane/Calcott, Shrawardine, Stapleton, Stoney Stretton, Uffington, Vennington, Vron Gate, Walford Heath/Oldwood, Withington, Wollaston, Woolstaston, Wrentnall, Wroxeter Angel Bank/Farden, Ashford Bowdler, Ashford Carbonell, Aston Munslow, Aston Pigott, Aston Rogers, Aston-On-Clun, Beambridge/Aston Mill, Bedlam, Bedstone, Bentlawnt, Besom Woods/Wheathill, Bitterley, Bouldon, Bromfield, Broome, Catherton Common, Caynham, Chapel Lawn, Cheney Longville, Chirbury, Clee St Margaret, Clunbury, Clungunford, Clunton, Cockshutford, Colebatch, Corfton/Corfton Bache, Crowsnest, Culmington, Dhustone, Diddlebury, Doddington, Edgton/Basford, Felhampton, Greete, Hatton, Haytons Bent/Up Lo Hayton, Hints, Holdgate, Hope, Hope Bagot, Hope Bowdler, Hopesay, Hopton Bank, Hopton Castle, Hungerford/Broadstone, Knowbury, Little Stretton, Llanfair Waterdine, Long Meadow End, Longville In The Dale, Lydbury North, Lydham, Marton, Meadowtown, Middlehope, Middleton, Milson, More, Munslow, Nash, Neen Sollars, Newcastle, Obley, Onibury, Overton, Pennerley/The Bog, Priest Weston, Ratlinghope, Rushbury/Roman Bank, Shelve, Snailbeach, Stiperstones/Perkins Beach, Stoke St Milborough, Stokesay, Strefford, The Sheet, Ticklerton, Wall Under Heywood, Wallbank, Wentnor, Westhope, Whitcot, Whitcot Keysett, Whittingslow, Whitton, Whittytree/Duxmoor, Wistanstow, Woofferton, Woolston, Worthen/Brockton Acton Round, Astley Abbots, Aston Eyre, Badger, Billingsley, Boningale, Bourton, Burwarton, Button Oak, Chesterton, Chetton, Chorley, Colemore Green, Cross Lane Head, Easthope, Farley, Hampton Loade, Heath Hill, Heathton, Hilton, Homer, Jackfield, Kemberton, Middleton Priors, Monkhopton, Muckley Cross, Neenton, Nordley, Norton, Quatford, Quatt, Romsley, Ryton, Shipley, Sidbury, Stanmore Camp, Stanton Long, Sutton, The Hobbins, Tong, Tuckhill, Upton Cressett, Weston, Oldbury,
These settlements are not named in any Local Plans
- 13 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Appendix 2: Current Local Plan policies (summary) assigned to standardised tiers Tier Tier a Tier b Tier c Standardised Main towns categories North Shropshire District Local Plan
Policy G1 “…the majority of new development in the District will be located within or on the edges of the 4 Market Towns…”
Oswestry Borough Local Plan
Policy H5 & table 3.2 “The majority of the 2400 new dwellings required in the Borough between 1993 and 2006 will be located in the following larger settlements : Oswestry Town incl Morda, Gobowen, Kinnerley, Llanymynech, Pant, Ruyton XI Towns, St.Martins, Trefonen, West Felton, Weston Rhyn, Whittington” Para 1.32-1.34 “…In line with the sustainable outlook on future development, and the strategy set out in the Structure Plan, development is concentrated within Shrewsbury.
Shrewsbury & Atcham Borough Local Plan
South Shropshire
Policy SDS3 “…Craven Arms will be the principal centre for
Tier d
Main service village
Local service village (small scale development)
Limited development (conversions or 1-2 dwellings)
Policy G1 “…In the rural settlements of the District limited development will be encouraged where it meets local needs or can provide support for existing services and contribute to the wellbeing and economic vitality of communities. The principal focus of rural development will be the Main Service Villages…” Policy H5 & table 3.2 “The majority of the 2400 new dwellings required in the Borough between 1993 and 2006 will be located in the following larger settlements : Oswestry Town incl Morda, Gobowen, Kinnerley, Llanymynech, Pant, Ruyton XI Towns, St.Martins, Trefonen, West Felton, Weston Rhyn, Whittington”
Policy G1 “Some development may also be permitted in Local Service Villages, commensurate with the smaller scale of these settlements.”
Policy G1 “In settlements listed as ‘Other Villages’ new development will generally be limited to the sympathetic conversion of suitable buildings within or adjacent to settlements, together with proposals which support well conceived schemes of rural diversification”
Policy H6 “The following settlements are suitable for a limited scale of housing development:”
Policy H7 “Infill developments of one or two dwellings and, exceptionally, small groups of dwellings, will be allowed on suitable sites within the development boundaries of the following settlements :”
Policies HS3 & EM3 “…Development in the rural area will be restricted to those larger settlements containing a sustainable range of facilities and services and these have development boundaries within which development opportunities may exist…” Policy SDS3 “…Bishop’s Castle, Burford, Church Stretton, Cleobury
No equivalent policy
Policies HS4 & EM3 “…A second tier of villages includes those that do not have development boundaries, but which are considered eligible to have small scale development of one or two dwellings by virtue of having a reasonable range of services…”
- 14 -
Policy SDS3 “…Within the settlements of Bucknell,
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper District Local Plan
growth…”
Mortimer and Ludlow will provide opportunities for more limited growth…”
Bridgnorth Shropshire District Local Plan
Policy H3 Principal towns Bridgnorth, Shifnal
Policy H3 Key settlements Albrighton, Broseley, Highley, Much Wenlock
Clee Hill and Clun infill housing development will be permitted within the settlement boundaries shown on the inset maps, of a scale which is in keeping with the character of the settlement…” No equivalent policy
Policy H4 “…only residential development in accordance with policies H11, H12, H14 & RD2…”
Note: These policies did not apply for the ten year period: they reflect Local Plans adopted at different times, some as recently as 2005.
- 15 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Appendix 3 These figures are displayed in the three graphs in the main text. 1998-2008 Employment Development Completions (hectares) Tier a: main Tier b: main Tier c: local Tier d: limited towns service service development villages villages
Tier e: other settlements
NSDC 18.029 0.268 0.000 0.886 0.433 OBC 6.020 0.439 0.015 0.013 0.375 SABC 37.929 1.073 0.000 0.967 2.951 SSDC 1.773 8.221 0.049 0.000 5.050 BDC 3.526 0.582 0.000 0.752 2.804 Shropshire 67.277 10.583 0.064 2.618 11.613 Source: PLUMS completions (of planning permissions) data, Shropshire Council
Tier f: within 400m of settlements 6.419 5.288 3.478 1.056 0.295 16.536
Tier g: open countryside
8.619 2.185 3.734 3.452 5.610 23.600
total
34.654 14.335 50.132 19.601 13.569 132.291
1998-2008 Housing development completions (no. dwellings) Tier a Tier b Tier c Tier d Tier e Tier f Tier g total Main towns Main service Local service Limited Other Within 400m Open villages villages (small development settlements of settlements countryside scale development) NSDC 1,720 545 148 124 12 162 766 3,477 OBC 1,146 677 86 41 51 36 122 2,159 SABC 2,171 346 0 92 205 66 313 3,193 SSDC 215 1,301 86 0 409 118 370 2,499 BDC 489 355 0 104 171 42 297 1,458 Shropshire 5,741 3,224 320 361 848 424 1,868 12,786 Source: PLUMS completions (of planning permissions) data, Shropshire Council
- 16 -
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Barn Conversions No. barn % of total 1998-2008 conversions completions NSDC 264 7.6% OBC 96 4.4% SABC 274 8.6% SSDC 218 8.7% BDC 299 20.5% Shropshire 1151 9.0% SOURCE: Development trends reports 2008
1998-2008 Development by settlement type - proportions Tier e: Tier a: Tier b: Tier c: Tier d: main main local limited other towns service service development settlements villages villages NSDC employment 52.0% 0.8% 0.0% 2.6% 1.2% NSDC residential 49.5% 15.7% 4.3% 3.6% 0.3% OBC employment 42.0% 3.1% 0.1% 0.1% 2.6% OBC residential 53.1% 31.4% 4.0% 1.9% 2.4% SABC employment 75.7% 2.1% 0.0% 1.9% 5.9% SABC residential 68.0% 10.8% 0.0% 2.9% 6.4% SSDC employment 9.0% 41.9% 0.2% 0.0% 25.8% SSDC residential 8.6% 52.1% 3.4% 0.0% 16.4% BDC employment 26.0% 4.3% 0.0% 5.5% 20.7% BDC residential 33.5% 24.3% 0.0% 7.1% 11.7% Shropshire employment 50.9% 8.0% 0.0% 2.0% 8.8% Shropshire residential 44.9% 25.2% 2.5% 2.8% 6.6%
- 17 -
Tier f: Tier g: total within open 400m of countryside settlements 18.5% 24.9% 100.0% 4.7% 22.0% 100.0% 36.9% 15.2% 100.0% 1.7% 5.7% 100.0% 6.9% 7.4% 100.0% 2.1% 9.8% 100.0% 5.4% 17.6% 100.0% 4.7% 14.8% 100.0% 2.2% 41.3% 100.0% 2.9% 20.4% 100.0% 12.5% 17.8% 100.0% 3.3% 14.6% 100.0%
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Part 3: MARKET TOWN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT Table 7: Past trends, land availability and indicative level of development (dwellings) Past average annual rate 1998-2008 (dwellings per year) 1. Sub-regional centre Shrewsbury
217.1
Past rate x 20 years continuing past trends Completions 2006-2026 2006-09
Permissions April 09
Unused Allocations April 09
SHLAA sites within development boundaries
Total land availability
4342
624
1454
260
1480
3818
Notes
CS3 indicative range
RSS requirement
2. Market towns & key centres North West spatial zone Oswestry
94.6
1892
423
256
5
490
1174
>1,000
Ellesmere
19.3
386
56
424
0
188
668
500-1,000
North East spatial zone Whitchurch
55.1
1102
110
191
371
35
707
Market Drayton
76.6
1532
210
221
45
74
550
Wem
21.0
420
83
245
0
66
394
4.9
98
15
4
0
32
51
past trends and vision suggest >1,000 past trends and vision suggest >1,000 vision suggests more than past trends
>1,000
>1,000
500-1,000
Central spatial zone Minsterley
- 18 -
vision suggests more than
200-500
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Pontesbury South spatial zone Ludlow Craven Arms Church Stretton Bishops Castle Cleobury Mortimer East spatial zone Bridgnorth
Shifnal
Much Wenlock Broseley Highley
Albrighton*
past trends vision suggests more than past trends
5.2
104
30
16
0
71.4
1428
145
239
0
84
468
21.5
430
60
44
80
35
219
200-500
20.4
408
36
36
0
37
109
200-500
13.0
260
19
29
0
37
85
200-500
15.0
300
104
62
0
26
192
200-500
28.4
568
130
509
0
0
639
500-1,000
46
land constraints
may be needed to meet military requirement
200-500
500-1,000
20.5
410
121
93
190
51
455
10.3
206
9
33
0
77
119
200-500
7.2
144
21
58
90
6
175
200-500
8.9
178
72
18
51
7
148
200-500
9.1
182
12
24
- 19 -
80
40
156
may be needed to meet military requirement
500-1,000
200-500
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Part 4: SPATIAL ZONE EMPLOYMENT DEVELOPMENT Table 8: Past trends, land availability and indicative level of development (hectares) Past average annual rate 1998-2008 (hectares per year)
Past rate x 20 years continuing past trends for 2006-2026
Completions 2006-09
Permissions April 09
Unused Allocations April 09
Committed Employment Land
Notes on requirements for new land
CS1 indicative range
76
12.2
23.6
14
50
Provision within strategic locations
90
1. Sub-regional centre 3.8
Shrewsbury
2. Market towns & key centres North West spatial zone Oswestry
0.6
12
1.4
2.1
18.2
21.7
Ellesmere
0.16
3.2
1.0
0.8
7.0
8.8
Spatial Zone
1.59
31.8
4.3
8.5
28.3
41
land availability constraints limiting role of Oswestry satisfy new employment needs -
55 - 65
North East spatial zone Whitchurch
1.1
22
3.4
4.0
10.7
18
Market Drayton
0.47
9.4
1.2
0.8
19
21
Wem
0.04
0.8
0.1
0.12
2.1
2.3
Spatial Zone
3.3
66
9.3
11.3
34.6
55.2
- 20 -
satisfy local employer needs satisfy local employer needs satisfy new employment needs significant commitments fall within target range
50 - 60
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Central spatial zone Minsterley
0.04
0.8
-
0.5
-
0.5
satisfy local employer needs
Pontesbury
-
-
-
-
-
-
satisfy local employment needs
Spatial Zone
1.22
24.4
1.9
12.4
-
14.3
significant commitments fall within target range
Ludlow
0.24
4.8
1.0
1.4
1.0
3.4
Craven Arms
0.18
3.6
0.8
3.0
3.4
7.2
Church Stretton
0.01
0.2
-
0.08
-
0.08
Bishops Castle
0.39
7.8
-
2.5
-
2.5
Cleobury Mortimer
0.004
0.08
-
0.12
-
0.12
Spatial Zone
1.96
39.2
3.7
10.0
5.8
19.5
Bridgnorth
0.37
7.4
0.43
8.0
3.1
11.5
Shifnal
0.006
0.12
-
0.2
-
0.2
Much Wenlock
0.024
0.48
-
-
1.6
1.6
Broseley
0.027
0.54
-
-
-
-
5 - 15
South spatial zone satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs -
East spatial zone
- 21 -
land availability constraints limiting role of Bridgnorth satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs
35 – 45
Analysis of development, demographic and economic trends over 1998-2008 Background Paper
Highley
0.001
0.02
-
-
0.6
0.6
Albrighton
0.006
0.12
-
-
-
-
Spatial Zone
1.36
27.2
5.0
10.5
6.3
21.8
- 22 -
satisfy new employment needs satisfy new employment needs -
30 - 40
