Replacement Calderdale UDP : Adopted 25 August 2006 (as amended August 2009)

Replacement Calderdale UDP : Adopted 25 August 2006

• Foreword
• 1 Introduction
  • The Need to Replace the Existing UDP
  • The Plan Making Process
  • Understanding the Replacement Calderdale UDP
  • Strategic Environmental and Appropriate Assessment of the Replacement UDP
  • Future of the Development Plan in Calderdale
• 2 Calderdale in Context
• Strategic and Core Part One Policies
• 3 Guiding Principles and Key Themes
• 4 Employment, The Economy, Tourism and Regeneration
• 5 Housing
• 6 Retailing and Town Centres
• 7 Open Space, Sport and Recreation Facilities
• 8 The Built and Historic Environment
• 9 Transport
• 10 Infrastructure, Education and Community Facilities
• 11 Natural Environment and the Countryside
• 12 Environmental Protection
• 13 Minerals
• 14 Waste Management
• 15 Monitoring and Review of the Plan
• Annex A Privacy, Daylighting and Amenity Space
• Annex B Trees On or Adjacent to Development Sites
• Appendix 1 National Planning Policy
• Appendix 2 National Minerals Policy
• Appendix 3 Supporting Published Documents
• Appendix 4 Glossary of Terms
• Appendix 5 Acronyms and Abbreviations
• Appendix 6 Policy Topic Index
• Appendix 7 Policy Number Comparison
• Appendix 8 Supplementary Maps

Strategic Environmental and Appropriate Assessment of the Replacement UDP

1.14 As part of the plan-making process, the Council has to consider the effects of the Environmental Assessment of Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 (SEA Regulations) Regulation 6(2), and Articles 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC. In considering this legislation the Council has considered whether it has been feasible to undertake Strategic Environmental Assessment or whether Appropriate Assessment has been necessary.

Strategic Environmental Assessment

1.15 On July 19 2006, the Council resolved to adopt the Replacement Calderdale Unitary Development Plan without submitting the Replacement UDP to Environmental Assessment under these Regulations for the following reasons:

1. The Plan was at an advanced stage of preparation as at July 21 2004. It had been through initial and revised deposit and a Public Inquiry had been arranged to commence in January 2005. An Inspector had been appointed and the relevant parties had been appraised of this situation.
2. The expectation of the timetable then in existence was that the Replacement UDP would be adopted well before July 2006, and therefore the implications of the SEA Regulations did not apply.
3. The Replacement UDP was at such a stage in the preparation process that at that time (July 2004), it is considered that such an appraisal would not add value to the plan’s contents and would be unlikely to identify environmental effects that would result in the plan being amended.
4. The expense and inconvenience to participants in the plan making process of a delay caused by the application of the SEA Regulations through delay in undertaking the public inquiry, when the expectation of all participants was that the plan would proceed to adoption before July 2006.
5. Environmental Appraisal of the Replacement UDP had been undertaken as part of the process of developing the draft plan. Whilst this appraisal is not SEA for the purposes of the Regulations, it did identify a number of policy areas where minor amendments to the plan were necessary. It did not identify any significant environmental implications of the plan, and it is considered likely that an SEA would not have identified any areas where fundamental revision (including mitigation action) to the Draft Plan was required.

Appropriate Assessment

1.16 In accordance with the requirements of Articles 6(3) and (4) of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC, the Council undertook a screening of the Replacement Calderdale Unitary Development Plan. This screening reached the conclusion that Appropriate Assessment under the requirements of the Directive is not necessary.

Back to Top