65 Slayley View Road

Barlborough
Chesterfield
S43 4UQ

19 August 2009

Dear Mr Ball

Application reference: 09/00370/OUTMAJ Residential and commercial

development (business, industrial and warehousing, Class B1, B2 and
B8) including new roundabout and associated roads at rear of 16 to 124
and south west of 124 and between Brickyard Farm and Barlborough
Links, Chesterfield Road, Barlborough.

We wish to object to the above application. As highlighted in the planning

notice, this application does not correspond with the Local Development Plan
for the area. The site is not designated as residential or commercial
development land and therefore in accordance with the Planning and
Compensation Act 2004 should be refused. Granting permission for
unallocated land is premature and undermines the Local Development
Framework process.

There is no requirement for additional housing sites within the District of

Bolsover. The housing supply requirement for the next 5 years from 1st April
2008 to 31st March 2013 is for 1814 dwellings.i The current supply of
deliverable sites will provide 1880 dwellings. There is an oversupply of 66
dwellings - the Council therefore has a 5 year supply of deliverable sites for
housing.

The current application includes 50 homes for social housing. However, the
Supplementary Planning Guidance – Affordable Housingii stipulates that all
new developments over 25 houses have to provide some element of
affordable/social housing and this is usually in proportion to local housing
needs as defined in a local housing study. Therefore, as part of the 5 year
housing supply, the affordable/social housing needs of the District are already
being met. In addition, Bolsover District Council is working in partnership on
other successful social schemes which are bringing unsold homes back into
use.iii The provision of social housing in this application is not a good enough
reason to approve a proposal which conflicts with the Development Plan.
Neither could this site of 150 dwellings be described as a Rural Exceptions
Housing site as it is far too bigivv.

The Noise Impact Assessment (NIA) report by RandTech Consulting (13th

February 2008) should be reviewed by the Council’ s environmental health
officer. Given that the housing site is on the boundary of the M1 motorway, a
more robust NIA should be carried out. Currently, the 1 day (24hour) study on
Thursday 7th and Friday 8th February 2008 seems inadequate. Traffic flows
will vary throughout the week and the NIA study design should reflect this.

1
The report has classified the housing site as ‘C’based on the criteria for Noise
Exposure Categories for New Homes. The noise levels for the daytime (07.00
to 23.00 hrs) was 69.7dB. This is on the upper limit of the ‘
C’category – with
the cut off being 72dB. Guidance states that planning permission should not
normally be granted for category ‘ C’sites, unless adequate noise protection
measures are introduced. The NIA needs to be more comprehensive in
dealing with the noise mitigation measures, including building materials, site
layout, window design and acoustic fencing. The RandTech NIA does not take
into account the future increased traffic and associated noise levels which will
inevitably result from the M1 widening programme along this stretch of the
motorway. This issue needs to be addressed with traffic and noise projection
figures for the next few years.

The Air Quality Screening Assessment carried out by Scott Wilson reports
that the pollution levels are greater nearer the M1 and decrease as the
distance increases from the M1. They conclude that further more detailed
studies would be necessary if outline permission was granted, particularly if
the 20m band of land adjacent to the M1 carriageway was to be used as 10m
of this area will exceed the air quality objectives for nitrogen dioxide of
<37µg/m3. Barlborough already has two Air Quality Management areas
(Orchard Close and Chesterfield Road) because of the high levels of nitrogen
dioxide.

The Scott Wilson report states that the proposed development for 150 houses
will not of itself have any significant effect on the current air quality. However,
the report fails to take into account that part of this proposal is for business,
industrial and warehousing, Class B1, B2 and B8; this will invariably include
more distribution units which will significantly increase the road traffic, noise
and pollution in this area. It is a major concern that such a big housing
development is being considered on land in such close proximity to the M1
carriageway. It is our view that it is unethical to site social housing (where by
its definition there is already an element of deprivation) in an area where
residents are further disadvantaged because of the noise and poor air quality.

Barlborough has a higher than national average incidence of lung cancer

(21%)vi. Air pollution raises the risk of lung cancer. Pope et al. (2002)vii
reported that the risk of lung cancer death went up by 8% for every 10
micrograms of fine particles in a cubic metre of air breathed. The annualised
nitrogen dioxide levels recorded between 2002 and 2004 at two locations in
Barlborough, Orchard Close and Chesterfield Road, have increased year on
year:- 37.6 µg/m3 (2002), 40.2 µg/m3 (2003), 45.5 µg/m3 (2004)viii – an
increase of 8µg/m3 in 3 years. Given that the traffic has increased
considerably since this survey was undertaken, it is reasonable to assume
that the levels of nitrogen oxides (nitrogen dioxide and nitric oxide) have also
continued to increase. Based on the data presented by Pope et al. (2002), this
increase could already be having an effect on the incidence of lung cancer in
Barlborough. The effects of reducing the exposure to air pollution cannot be
underestimated. Pope et al (2009)ix have recently reported in The New
England Journal of Medicine that a reduction in exposure to ambient fine-

2
particulate air pollution contributed to significant and measurable
improvements in life expectancy in the United States.

Barlborough has a younger population and the youngest age profile in the
Bolsover districtx. Children are more vulnerable to the effects of air pollution.
This is because the ongoing process of lung development, incomplete
metabolic systems, immature host defences, high rates of infections by
respiratory pathogens and activity patterns specific to children can lead to
higher exposure to air pollution and higher doses of pollutants reaching the
lungs (when compared to adults).xi Chesterfield Road and the A619
Hancock’ s Hill is the main route to school and is the location of the only light
controlled pedestrian crossing in the village. The introduction of further light
controlled crossings, while necessary, will increase congestion and standing
traffic at these locations exposing children walking to school to higher levels of
pollutants, adversely affecting their lung development. Given that Bolsover
District Council is seeking to reduce the health inequalitiesxii this is an issue
which should warrant serious consideration.

To offset the effects of traffic polution, Barlborough needs a carbon

sequestration programme. Tree planting remains the single most effective
measure against carbon emissions, as part of this application there should be
a requirement to plant (and maintain until established) enough trees to offset
the emissions from the increased traffic. Perhaps the 20m band of land
(where the pollution levels are likely to exceed the acceptable limits) adjacent
to the M1 carriageway could be considered as a tree planting site? This will
improve the visual appearance, contribute to the noise reduction and partially
offsett the vehicle emissions in this area at least. While we note there is some
tree planting along the boundary with the M1 in the plans, we are not aware of
any detailed landscaping plans with this application.

Given the significant environmental health issues relating to noise, pollution

and contamination, this application and supporting documentation should be
referred to Bolsover District Council’
s environmental health officers for them to
comment in detail.

We remain very concerned about additional development which will result in

further traffic loading of the junction with the M1 and the roads through
Barlborough. The A616/A619/A6135 roundabout junction (Treble Bob
roundabout) is currently operating at 0.85 threshold of practical capacity
during the peak periods of operationxiii. Consequently, there is congestion and
delay. The transport assessment by Scott Wilson only includes committed
developments identified by Derbyshire County Council in their traffic estimates
and these are the Steetley regeneration development, Van Dyk hotel and
garden centre and Barlborough Links. It does not incorporate the plans to
develop North Clowne (as part of the Local Development Framework) which
includes: 1) the provision for 1300 houses in Clowne North (land north of
Creswell Road); 2) the extension of the Clowne Employment Growth Zone (to
incorporate Barlborough Links) by 30 hectares of land north of Clowne), for
mixed use ‘ live and work’development. Access will be via Barlborough at the
A616/A619/A6135 roundabout junction (Treble Bob roundabout). The

3
infrastructure is wholly inadequate. This cannot just be ignored. The plans to
re-engineer the Treble Bob roundabout with 3 lanes and partial signalisation
(which Derbyshire County Council does not support) will not solve the
fundamental problems that pedestrians have trying to move around the
village. It does not matter how many transport or travel plans are produced for
planning applications in this village, until someone takes the time to walk
around the village and experience the problems first hand that people have
trying to cross the roads on the A616/A619/A6135 roundabout junction, then
documents like the Travel Plan are purely a paper exercise to meet the
requirements of the planning process. For example:

1. People choose to drive their children to McDonald’ s because they cannot

safely cross Oxcroft Way onto Chesterfield Road. Vehicles approach the
Oxcroft Way exit at speed. From the bottom of Hancock’ s Hill vehicles will be
indicating left, but the pedestrian doesn’ t know which ‘ left’they are taking –
they could be going down Slayley View Road, Oxcroft Way or Chesterfield
Road. Therefore, pedestrians have to wait until there is a gap in the traffic as
they cannot risk starting to cross not knowing which exit the vehicle is going to
take. Because of the constant traffic, gaps in the traffic are few and far
between. Once there is a gap, they can cross to the middle of the road, but
would be unable to get all the way across. The central reservation is not wide
enough for pedestrians to stand there safely and cannot accommodate
pushchairs or mobility scooters. The approaching traffic divides into two lanes,
further obscuring the pedestrians view across the road. If you are trying to
cross with a pushchair and/or children, it is just about impossible without
risking the safety of yourself and that of your children. For those who are
visually impaired, elderly or have mobility problems the problems are
exacerbated where poor hearing, eyesight impairs their decision making
processes and reaction times. This is one of the main walking routes
highlighted in the Travel Plan as linking the proposed housing and
employment development with the rest of Barlborough village and Clowne.

We met with Derbyshire County Council highways officers in 2005 to discuss

a number of issues with them, one of which was crossing Oxcroft Way. The
highways officers would not stand on the kerbside of Oxcroft Way because
they felt it was too dangerous (and traffic levels have increased significantly
since then). However, this is still classed as one of the main walking access
routes to the rest of the village. In their feedback following the meeting, we
were told that the road was not wide enough to increase the size of the central
reservation. Neither could any kind of crossing be considered because of the
speed of the road and the stopping distances required.

2. Crossing Tally’ s End on foot is equally as difficult. The curvature and

40mph speed limit of Chesterfield Road means that traffic turning left onto
Tally’s End does so at speed. However, pedestrians crossing Tally’ s End are
obscured from view until the vehicle has turned. This makes it very dangerous
to cross at this point despite the fact that this is the designated crossing point
because of the drop kerbs. The above examples are merely illustrative and
are not exhaustive of the pedestrian/traffic problems in the village.

4
We raised these issues with the developer at the open day at the Ibis Hotel.
He said he couldn’ t be expected to solve all Barlborough’
s problems regarding
the roads and footpaths, and we would agree. However, neither can it be
argued, therefore, in the Travel Plan that residents and employees of the
proposed developments can walk and cycle easily around the village, when
clearly there are major physical barriers to them doing so. These barriers
significantly affect the existing population.

The Travel Plan should take into account the needs of the local people. A
thorough access assessment should be carried out with different population
groups – parents with children, hearing and visually impaired, able bodied,
mobility scooters etc. By carrying out an access study the real obstacles that
people face can be identified and addressed. Without this, the Travel Plan is
ineffective and the new housing and commercial development will be
physically isolated from the rest of the village.

In addition, the residential area is essentially separated from the other

residential areas of Barlborough by two major roads that will act as a barrier to
use of the public open space by the wider community due to the lack of formal
crossings. There are no obvious proposals to address this isolation by
creating formal pedestrian or cycle links to existing open spaces within
Barlborough, despite the development of green infrastructure being one of the
key design objectives of the development. We can see little evidence that this
will be adequately addressed.

According to Derbyshire County Council, Barlborough Primary School is

currently oversubscribed by approximately 18 pupils (January 2009 School
Census) and is projected to remain oversubscribed. Based on 150 homes
there would be a requirement for an additional 30 primary school places.
While DCC is requesting a contribution of £338,293.20 to ‘ address issues of
accommodation’we would have to ask how this ‘ accommodation’is going to
be achieved. Accommodating 30 pupils would require yet another classroom.
Three new classrooms have been built in the schools grounds; the most
recent one was completed in December 2008. Given that the Barlborough
Primary School is a Grade II listed building at the heart of the Barlborough
conservation area we cannot see how any further development would be
permitted (or physically accommodated) in the vicinity of this listed building.
Can DCC education department elaborate in more detail how they would
intend to accommodate 30 additional pupils in light of the constraints outlined
above?

The proposed residential development will see the loss of the only allotment
site in Barlborough (0.64ha). Part of the open space provision could be
considered for allotments; alternatively a commuted sum payment to
purchase suitable areas of land for allotments could be an option. This would
support the developments aims of enhancing biodiversity and recreational
benefits.

The S106 Agreement (which of course seeks to deliver some planning gain)
should reflect local needs. Discussions should therefore fully involve the
Parish Council (and Bolsover District and Derbyshire County Council where

5
appropriate). Contrary to what it says in the planning application covering
letter, neither Barlborough Parish Council, nor the local community have been
involved in identifying the local need or drawing up the S106 Agreement for
this application. This needs to be rectified.

Could you please notify us of the date for the planning committee meeting to
discuss this application (when it is announced)? We would wish to register our
interest to speak at the meeting.

Yours sincerely

Cllr Bridget Ingle

Cllr Stephen Riley
Cllr John Shaw
Cllr Sylvia Linacre

Barlborough First

i
Bolsover District Council Assessment of Five Year Supply of Deliverable sites for Housing,
under Planning Policy Statement 3, Paragraphs 68-74, Housing, (Department of Communities
and Local Government November 2006) and Associated Local Guidelines First Published
April 2007. Second Assessment considered and adopted 24th July 2008. Amended 17th
December 2008. http://209.85.229.132/search?q=cache:9lD--
vSbZ9YJ:www.bolsover.gov.uk/docs/GJC%25205%2520year%2520Housing%2520Supply.do
c+five+year+supply+guidelines+2008&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=uk
ii
Supplementary Planning Guidance – Affordable Housing
http://www.bolsover.gov.uk/pdf/Affordable%20Housing%20SPG%20update.pdf
iii
Bringing unsold homes back into use http://www.bolsover.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=9227
iv
Information Bulletin On Affordable Housing Provision In Bolsover District December 2008
http://www.bolsover.gov.uk/docs/INFORMATION%20BULLETIN.doc
v
Northern Sub-Regional Housing Group Bolsover – Strategic Housing Market Assessment
Executive Summary September 2007
http://www.bolsover.gov.uk/PDF/Bolsover%20Executive%20Summary_Final.pdf
vi
Bolsover District Council – Public Health Review August 2008
vii
Pope CA III, Burnett RT, Thun MJ, et al. Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-
term exposure to fine particulate air pollution. JAMA 2002;287:1132-1141
viii
Bolsover District Council – Local Air Quality Updating and Screening Assessment June
2006 pg 14– Angela Bostock, Pollution Control Advisor.
ix
C. Arden Pope, III, Ph.D., Majid Ezzati, Ph.D., and Douglas W. Dockery, Sc.D.
Fine-Particulate Air Pollution and Life Expectancy in the United States. NEJM 2009:360:376-
386
x
Barlborough Demographics http://www.bolsover.gov.uk/default.aspx?page=9053
xi
Effects of Air Pollution on Children’s Health and Development – World Health Organisation
A Review of the Evidence 2005
xii
Bolsover District Council – State of the District 2008
http://www.bolsover.gov.uk/docs/State%20of%20the%20District.doc
xiii
Derbyshire County Council 8th October 2008
http://planning.bolsover.gov.uk:8080/PlanApp/jsp/RDgetAllAppDocs.jsp?PlanningApplication
Number=08/00401/OUTMAJ