Kingston-on-Soar Housing Land Assessment

Parish / Town: Kingston-on-Soar

Site area (hectares): 0.8 hectares

Brownfield or greenfield: Brownfield

Dwelling capacity: 7

Density (dwellings/hectare): 9

Site source: Planning Application

Planning reference: 19/02825/PAO

Type of site: Freestanding

Allocated site reference: None

Status: Planning Permission for Residential Expired

Number of dwellings remaining: 7

Source of number of dwellings: Planning Application

Site on Brownfield Register: No

Green Belt: Not stated

Flood risk: Not stated

Landscape assessment: Not stated

Green infrastructure: Not stated

Historic environment: Not stated

Nature conservation: Not stated

Air quality / contamination: Not stated

Community facilities: Not stated

Highways and access: Not stated

Accessibility: Not stated

Other issues: Not stated

Agricultural land: Not stated

Deliverability: Prior approval expired. Not deliverable within 5 years.

Suitability: Suitable

Availability: Available 11 to 15 years

Achievability: Achievable 11 to 15 years

Delivery period: 2 years

Delivery: 5 Year Tranche - 11 to 15 Years

Overall summary: Prior approval expired. Not deliverable within 5 years.

Parish / Town: Kingston-on-Soar

Site area (hectares): 0.02 hectares

Brownfield or greenfield: Brownfield

Dwelling capacity: 1

Density (dwellings/hectare): 50

Site source: Planning Application

Planning reference: 17/01832/FUL

Type of site: Within key settlement

Allocated site reference: None

Status: Planning Permission for Residential Expired.

Number of dwellings remaining: 1

Source of number of dwellings: Planning Application

Site on Brownfield Register: No

Green Belt: Not stated

Flood risk: Not stated

Landscape assessment: Not stated

Green infrastructure: Not stated

Historic environment: Not stated

Nature conservation: Not stated

Air quality / contamination: Not stated

Community facilities: Not stated

Highways and access: Not stated

Accessibility: Not stated

Other issues: Not stated

Agricultural land: Not stated

Deliverability: Planning permission expired.

Suitability: Suitable

Availability: Available 11 to 15 years

Achievability: Achievable 11 to 15 years

Delivery period: 1 year

Delivery: 5 Year Tranche - 11 to 15 Years

Overall summary: Planning permission expired.

Parish / Town: Kingston-on-Soar

Site area (hectares): 358

Brownfield or greenfield: Greenfield

Dwelling capacity: 6,000

Density (dwellings/hectare): 17

Site source: Developer / Landowner Submission

Planning reference: None

Type of site: Freestanding

Allocated site reference: None

Status: No formal allocation or no extant planning permission for residential development.

Number of dwellings remaining: 6,000

Source of number of dwellings: Details obtained through external Site Submission.

Site on Brownfield Register: No

Green Belt: The site is located within the Kingston on Soar Broad Green Belt Area. This area scores 13. As a freestanding area, the land is isolated from the built up area of Nottingham and outlying settlements. The area is not contained by any substantial boundary features. A field drain comprises a significant extent of the northern and western boundary. Farm tracks and roads form the southern boundary. Woodlands and the West Leake Hills to the east provide a more robust strategic boundary to the east. Isolated from existing built up areas, this broad area is not visually connected to any built up area. Its removal would result in a significant area of land being removed between West Leake, Gotham, Kingston on Soar, and Ratcliffe on Soar Power Station. The character is open countryside, comprising arable farmland, woodlands and small ribbon developments along West Leake Road. The land is located approximately half a mile from Kingston on Soar, which contains a number of listed buildings. Kingston Hall and its grounds separate the site from the village. There are two notable heritage assets within the site - Land south of Kingston Farm forms part of historic Kingston Park and Kingston Fields Farmhouse is Grade 2 Listed. These however are not associated with a settlement.

Flood risk: Limited areas at risk of flooding from rivers. Some areas within the site at medium to high risk from surface water flooding.

Landscape assessment: The area has scenic quality and conservation interest related to Kingston Pleasure Grounds Registered Park and Gardens south of the area of search boundary at Kingston on Soar. A limited network of public rights of way provide some recreational access, notably in the south and east. Flat topography means the area is visually open, and has high intervisibility. Woodland south of the A453 offers the potential to create a distinctive place based on an existing green infrastructure network. Defensible boundaries are largely limited to the transport network, although woodland offers the opportunity to screen development, for example the area surrounding Winking Farm and the area east of Gotham could be developed without perceived sprawl creating adverse impacts on long views. Suitable for development. If the area north of Kingston Pleasure Grounds is developed this may have an adverse impact on the setting of the Registered Park and Garden.

Green infrastructure: Woodland within the site should be retained and enhanced. Hedgerows and watercourses should also be retained and enhanced. Significant area is located within the Gotham Hills, West Leake and Bunny Ridgeline Biodiversity opportunity area, where existing priority habitats are woodland and grassland.

Historic environment: Kingston Pleasure Grounds is a historic park and garden (Grade II), part of which lies adjacent to the site. HER identifies old quarry (at Scotland Farm), clay pits and Gypsum mine (both along Dark Lane). Avoid allocation of land within the setting of the Historic Park and Garden where this would cause harm. Standard historical / archaeological investigations as part of any proposal.

Nature conservation: A number of local wildlife sites adjacent to the site. Tree, woodland and grassland contained within the site.

Air quality / contamination: Not within or within proximity to an air quality management area. Areas identified as potentially contaminated include Oaks Farm and the site of New Kingston sewage works.

Community facilities: No community facilities within or near to the site. Would need provision to support any development.

Highways and access: Unknown at this stage whether satisfactory access can be achieved to the site at this present time. There is a grade-separated junction at the north of the site onto the A453 trunk road.

Accessibility: Connectivity by foot or cycle to surrounding area is limited. No community facilities within the vicinity of the site. There are several bus routes located around the site.

Other issues: No known contamination. Utilities would require upgrading to serve the site. There are known gypsum workings under parts of the site and unworked gypsum resources. British Gypsum advises that minerals sterilisation should not occur, and that the making good of former gypsum workings involves grouting which comes at a significant cost.

Agricultural land: Majority of site is grade 3 a/b, but also a significant amount of grade 2.

Deliverability: A number of important constraints have been identified. Perhaps the most significant of which is the significant amount of land that would have to be taken from the Green Belt. The proposal may also lead to a degree of quality has been identified as good. Further work has been undertaken through the Growth Options Study and this will inform the selection of strategic sites within the Greater Nottingham Strategic Plan. Therefore there are no firm conclusions at present in relation to the sites suitability for housing and it could be suitable if policy changes. There are however some issues raised in terms of whether the site is 'available now'.

Suitability: Could be suitable

Availability: Available 11 to 15 years

Achievability: Achievable 11 to 15 years

Delivery period: Not applicable

Delivery: Could be suitable if policy changes 5+ years

Overall summary: A number of important constraints have been identified. Perhaps the most significant of which is the significant amount of land that would have to be taken from the Green Belt. Some of the land is BMV (best and most versatile) agricultural land, and may be an impact on the setting of heritage assets. Biggest technical constraint is the presence and legacy mining of gypsum under parts of the site