Sandwell Local Plan - Issues & Options Consultation
5. Healthy People and Communities
Sandwell is a borough with high levels of poor health and deprivation and a lower than average life expectancy. The people of Sandwell experience significant inequalities in health when compared to the rest of England. On average, they do not live for as long as people in other areas of England and spend more of their lives ill or disabled[24].
The Marmot Review of Health Inequalities showed that the largest influences on physical and mental health are the social determinants of health, for example, education, employment, social networks and housing[25]. These aspects can be positively impacted by planning for the right development in the best locations, which is what the SLP will do.
There are various elements that can contribute to increasing physical activity in a healthy environment such as encouraging change in travel behaviour to active modes of travel, active design, access to green and blue spaces, allotments, safe places, clean air and a positive soundscape. In one study, people with good access to green spaces were 24% more likely to be active[26].
17) Questions – Development for Health
Do we need to include specific development allocations such as sites for retirement facilities or assisted living?
What should the plan contain that would help you change your travel habits to more active modes of travel (such as cycling and walking)?
Community and social facilities are those aspects of a town, district or local centre that enable people to make the most of their local area. They provide those services and functions that allow people to interact with each other; they also deliver the facilities that make society run smoothly. Any successful and sustainable location or development will deliver and enhance these functions as part of their offer.
Community and social facilities can include (but not be limited to) the following: -
- health and social care facilities (e.g. GP surgeries, NHS walk-in centres, dentists);
- leisure and sports facilities;
- green infrastructure and heritage assets (e.g. parks, gardens, woodlands, playing fields, allotments, cemeteries);
- transport (e.g. footpaths, bridleways, cycleways, highways, public transport, railways, car parks);
- community centres / meeting halls;
- youth facilities;
- play facilities;
- library and information services;
- cultural facilities;
- places of worship;
- theatres, public art, heritage centres;
- public house;
- local shops;
- post offices;
- schools and other places of learning.
Making sure new development is located where there is access to these services and facilities will ensure that sustainable, vibrant and healthy communities can be created and supported. Where such facilities don't exist or are not sufficient to meet the needs of local communities, the SLP can help to identify what infrastructure might be required to do so.
Increasing the provision of, and accessibility to, sports fields and areas for active recreation will have a positive impact on the health and fitness of local communities, as well as supporting community interactions and participation in formal sports. We have recently completed a review of the Playing Pitch and Outdoor Sports Strategy for Sandwell as part of the work undertaken for the BCP and so have a very clear understanding of the demand for, and supply of, facilities for sport.
Sport England's publication 'Active Design'[27] provides details, case studies and a framework describing how to incorporate active lifestyles and sport into cities, towns and villages. Sport England states that,
"Active Design wraps together the planning and considerations that should be made when designing the places and spaces we live in. It's about designing and adapting where we live to encourage activity in our everyday lives, making the active choice the easy choice".
18) Question – Active Recreation
Should we require masterplans and new developments to refer to the Sport England Active Design Principles[28]?
One issue that has become apparent is the reuse of buildings for community facilities and services. In some cases, these new uses can attract large numbers of visitors and might generate significant additional traffic on often congested local roads, especially in residential areas. A possible solution may be to encourage community uses to occupy vacant premises in town centres, where increased activity can more easily be accommodated, not least by walking and cycling routes for short journeys and public transport networks and the availability of more accessible parking where deemed appropriate. Given the increase in vacant retail and other commercial buildings in town centres, this would also help to maintain the vitality and viability of centres by introducing additional visitors and activity.
19) Questions – Community Facilities and Services
Setting aside health-related uses (surgeries, health centres, dentists etc.), schools and shops for a moment, are there any other public facilities and services you would like to see more of in Sandwell?
Is there a shortage of community facilities and services in your area?
- Which ones are lacking, in your view?
(If you can give us an idea of what part of Sandwell you are referring to, that would be helpful)
If you think your area needs more community facilities and services, how and where would you want to see these uses provided?
- We would be especially interested in locations where services can be easily accessed without people having to use a car.
Where new community facilities are proposed, such as churches, mosques, community centres and other uses generating additional footfall / car journeys, should the SLP require those uses to be sited in town centres in most cases?
- If you disagree with this, can you explain why?
Green infrastructure is about more than just landscaping schemes, although it will also include amenity planting and layouts. Green infrastructure is essentially a network of multi-functional green space and other natural features that have benefits for the quality of life and environment of communities. These assets will support habitats and biodiversity as well as creating shelter, a focus and possibly a way of shaping plots, defining routes and building phases and can include parks, open spaces, playing fields, woodlands, street trees, allotments, private gardens and green roofs and walls.
They will also assist in water absorption and improving air quality. Linked open spaces (overlooked by active frontages) of a variety of sizes, sense of enclosure and function should run through the scheme, to provide pleasant walkways, opportunities for exercise and outdoor public sitting areas. They will also help to create and sustain wildlife corridors. It will include proposals to use green assets such as hedgerows and trees as fully as possible.
Blue infrastructure refers to the planned handling of water and drainage on sites and the incorporation of existing water features such as rivers, canals and ponds into designs. This will usually be closely associated with green infrastructure and can include swales, drainage ditches, balancing ponds and other components of a sustainable drainage scheme, contributing to the absorption and slow release of surface water.
Sandwell has an unparalleled network of leisure waterways that are increasingly valued as corridors of biodiversity, passive or active recreation and sustainable transport. Towns Fund bids have prioritised significant investment in upgrading the infrastructure of canals and raising their profile to encourage usage, especially as canals are supported and loved by many. More could be made of canals and waterways where they adjoin proposed development sites and areas identified for recreational and leisure use. We intend to use the draft BCP policy relating to canals as a basis for further consideration of the role canals and waterways play in the environment of Sandwell, perhaps through the introduction of separate guidance.
20) Questions – Green and Blue Infrastructure
Should the SLP take a more positive approach to ensuring green and blue infrastructure and their benefits are maximised in new development?
- Should new green / blue infrastructure always be required on sites?
- Should it be required even if it would mean losing the opportunity to provide more housing or employment development?
The NPPF (revised July 2021) requires local authorities to plan positively for the provision and use of shared spaces, including open space (paragraph 93). In paragraph 98, it goes on to state,
Access to a network of high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and physical activity is important for the health and well-being of communities and can deliver wider benefits for nature and support efforts to address climate change. Planning policies should be based on robust and up-to-date assessments of the need for open space, sport and recreation facilities (including quantitative or qualitative deficits or surpluses) and opportunities for new provision.
New housing developments will often include an element of open space, but to date no formal policy guidance has been available from Sandwell Council about exactly how much open space should be provided. A broad monitoring target of 4.42ha of accessible open space per 1,000 population has been established, but there is currently no formula for calculating open space provision to meet additional needs generated by new housing, or to maintain or improve existing supply.
As larger and more complex housing sites are brought forward within Sandwell, having a formal requirement for additional open space would allow the Council to maintain and, in some instances, improve the borough's supply of open and informal spaces.
Other authorities have produced policies and related planning guidance on the provision of open space on development sites and this is an issue to be considered in Sandwell. For example, policies elsewhere may state that development proposals should maintain and /or enhance the quantity, quality and accessibility of open space and address any shortfalls in provision, when measured against locally derived standards; or development that increases demand for open space will be required to address this demand in line with the relevant planning policy.
There are questions around the viability of requiring housebuilders to give up land that might otherwise go for housing, and that will need to be considered when the Council decides how to take this issue forward.
There is also a need to consider whether we should be prepared to accept the loss of some current open spaces (for example, those areas that are of poor quality, low accessibility and minimal value to local communities and that would cost a disproportionate amount of money to upgrade), to provide development sites and help meet our housing need. In turn, releasing such sites for alternative development could protect more environmentally sensitive land from development pressure; we could also require the provision of replacement open spaces of a higher quality than previously to compensate as part of any new development. On the other hand, it is often the case that even land in poor condition can have value for local people and wildlife.
It may be that a combination of open space provision can be agreed, such as on-site provision where possible in the first instance, off-site provision or improvements to existing facilities in the immediate vicinity or as a last resort, a commuted financial contribution to be spent elsewhere on open space and recreation improvements.
The draft Black Country Plan included policies on open space and recreational provision and we intend to incorporate amended versions of those policies where they are relevant to Sandwell. They relate to the following areas:
- Open Space and Recreation
- Playing Fields and Sports Facilities
21) Questions – Open Space
Do you think development proposals, especially big housing schemes, should always include dedicated open space for recreation and leisure on site?
- If not, can you explain why?
Do you think a combined approach (provision of open space on-site / new off-site provision / financial contributions for improvements to existing open space nearby) would be more appropriate?
- Can you explain why?
What scale of housing site do you think should be required to contribute towards providing open space? For example, should we be asking for new open space on
- sites above ten houses in size
- sites above 20 houses in size
- sites above 40 houses in size?
- see improvements to existing areas of open space in your area, or
- see new open spaces be created when development happens nearby?
Can you explain a bit more about why you think this?
What amount of open space should be provided? For example, should new open space be provided covering: -
- 10%
- 15%
- 20%
- another percentage (please say how much)
of the area of a housing site?
Should the amount of open space instead be calculated based on the number of bedrooms per property being provided?
- For example, developments delivering larger accommodation (properties with three, four or more bedrooms) should provide more open space than those for one or two bedroomed properties.
Should open space requirement be relaxed for types of housing that are less likely to generate high levels of active demand, such as accommodation for older people?
If large areas of open space are required, this might affect how many houses can be built on a site and / or the viability of development on the site – what is your view on that?
- consider releasing existing open space sites for development that are demonstrated to be of poor quality and low value and that have no significant environmental benefits?
- consider releasing existing open space sites for development that are demonstrated to be of poor quality and low value and that have no significant environmental benefits but only where replacement open space of a higher quality / quantity can be provided nearby?
- protect all current open space notwithstanding its condition or accessibility (on the basis that it has value in its own right and could be improved in future)?
What type of open space should be provided? For example, informal open space such as fields for walking, dog walking etc., playgrounds / play areas for children, formal parks, allotments etc.?
Would you like to see more allotments / opportunities for growing food in your community provided as part of housing developments or in the wider area?
Hot food takeaways and gambling establishments are legitimate and licensed / registered aspects of functioning communities and are not inappropriate in suitable places. Planning and planning policies do not assign moral weight to their operation or use, and they provide for the needs of people who patronise them with no related adverse impacts, for the most part.
However, these are also uses that, if over-concentrated in an area or located near other potentially sensitive uses, can cause a harmful effect on vitality and viability, character, function and amenity, and can also have negative impacts on people's health and wellbeing.
The onset of the COVID19 pandemic and its related lockdowns saw the Government relaxing the relevant legislation to allow pubs and restaurants to offer takeaways, to enable them to continue trading at a time when the hospitality sector was under great economic pressure. This relaxation was extended to March 2022 and there has so far been no further advice or guidance from the government on when it might be rescinded.
Betting shops and adult gaming centres can also have negative impacts, particularly where there are high concentrations of these uses in a location. This particularly relates to the impacts on retail areas and the impact upon personal health and wellbeing related to problem gambling.
Planning policies and supplementary planning documents (such as the Council's current SPD on hot food takeaways) can, where justified, seek to limit the proliferation of certain uses where evidence demonstrates this is appropriate (and where such uses require planning permission). This could include having regard to the impact of certain uses in proximity to locations where children and young people congregate such as schools, community centres and playgrounds, and the over-concentration of certain uses within a specified area.
22) Questions – Hot Food Takeaways and Gambling Establishments
Do you think the Council should look more closely at where businesses such as hot food takeaways and gambling establishments are located?
Do you have a view on where they should be allowed in relation to sensitive uses such as schools, etc.?
Do you think that the SLP should try to control / regulate hot food takeaways or not (bearing in mind that there is no legislation that allows councils to refuse planning permission for these uses solely on the basis that people find them undesirable)?
This could be addressed by having a policy that looked at:
- Clustering (only granting permission for a given number / percentage of similar uses within a certain radius, limiting the maximum number of consecutive takeaway food outlets, or capping the proportion of all retail space occupied by this use in an area)
- Location (refusing consent for new proposals within a given distance of a sensitive use e.g. schools, parks, leisure facilities including sport centres and youth clubs)
- The implementation of community infrastructure levies with funds allocated to obesity prevention initiatives;
- Mandatory sign-up to a healthy catering commitment scheme and requirements for submission of health impact assessments alongside planning applications.
- Impacts on the amenity of residential and other sensitive uses e.g. by creating excessive noise, litter, odours, traffic problems
Do you think that the SLP should try to control / regulate betting shops, adult gaming centres, amusement arcades, pawnbrokers, pay day loan shops and shisha bars (bearing in mind that there is no legislation that allows councils to refuse planning permission for these uses solely on the basis that some people find them undesirable)?
This could be addressed by having a policy that looked at:
- Clustering (as for hot food takeaways);
- Location relative to sensitive uses (as for hot food takeaways);
- Providing an active frontage creating a positive visual impact on the street scene;
- Impacts on local community and residential amenity.
[25] Marmot, M (2010). Fair Society, Healthy Lives, The Marmot Review.
[26] Natural England, Technical Information Note TIN055, "An estimate of the economic and health value and cost effectiveness of the expanded WHI scheme 2009", Natural England, 2009.
[27] Sport England, "Active Design: Planning for health and wellbeing through sport and physical activity," Sport England, 2015.