NEWCASTLE CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC LAND REVIEW

Transcription

APPENDIX 3
NEWCASTLE CITY COUNCIL
STRATEGIC LAND REVIEW
&
GREEN BELT ASSESSMENT
Part 2
Draft Final Report
May 2012
Draft Final Report
Contents
HOW TO COMMENT ON THIS REPORT.......................................................... 2
1
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT................................................................ 3
2
METHOD AND APPROACH ....................................................................... 6
3
KEY ASSUMPTIONS .................................................................................. 8
4
3.1
Approach to estimating site capacity.................................................... 8
3.2
Assumed Densities .............................................................................. 8
3.3
Approach to estimating build rates ..................................................... 10
3.4
Residential values .............................................................................. 12
SUMMARY OF KEY RECOMMENDATIONS............................................ 14
4.1
Introduction ........................................................................................ 14
4.2
Neighbourhood Growth Areas............................................................ 14
4.2.1
Callerton Park ............................................................................. 14
4.2.2
Lemington ................................................................................... 14
4.2.3
Newbiggin Hall ............................................................................ 14
4.2.4
Kingston Park & Kenton Bank Foot............................................. 14
4.2.5
North Gosforth ............................................................................ 14
4.2.6
Newcastle Great Park ................................................................. 14
4.2.7
Salters Lane................................................................................ 15
4.3
Village Growth Areas ......................................................................... 15
4.3.1
Dinnington................................................................................... 15
4.3.2
Wideopen.................................................................................... 15
4.3.3
Hazlerigg..................................................................................... 15
4.3.4
Woolsington ................................................................................ 15
4.3.5
Throckley .................................................................................... 15
4.3.6
Walbottle ..................................................................................... 15
4.3.7
Newburn ..................................................................................... 15
4.4
Illustration of Potential Build Rates..................................................... 16
Strategic Land Review Part 2
May 2012
APPENDIX : DETAILED SITE APPRAISALS................................................. 18
NEIGHBOURHOOD GROWTH AREAS ....................................................... 19
1. MIDDLE & UPPER CALLERTON ......................................................... 19
2. LOWER CALLERTON........................................................................... 29
3. NEWBIGGIN HALL ............................................................................... 36
4. LEMINGTON......................................................................................... 43
5. KINGSTON PARK & KENTON BANK FOOT........................................ 49
6. NORTH GOSFORTH ............................................................................ 61
7. NEWCASTLE GREAT PARK (western expansion)............................... 66
8. SALTERS LANE ................................................................................... 72
VILLAGE GROWTH AREAS ........................................................................ 79
9. DINNINGTON ....................................................................................... 79
10. WIDEOPEN......................................................................................... 87
11. HAZLERIGG ....................................................................................... 92
12. WOOLSINGTON ................................................................................. 97
13. THROCKLEY (NORTH) .................................................................... 102
14. THROCKLEY (SOUTH) .................................................................... 108
15. WALBOTTLE .................................................................................... 112
16. NEWBURN........................................................................................ 117
1
May 2012
HOW TO COMMENT ON THIS REPORT
Consultation of the Strategic Land Review will commence on the 20th June for
12 weeks until 13th September 2012.
The plans are available to view online at
www.newcastle.gov.uk/haveyoursayonplanning
and during the consultation period in Newcastle’s Libraries and Customer
Service Centres.
Comments on the Strategic Land Review Part 2 should be made by one of the
following methods:
Online:
https://onecorestrategyng-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal
By email:
planning&[email protected],uk
By post:
In the interest of the environment we are trying to maximise
electronic communication but we will still receive posted
representations if you are unable to communicate electronically.
Planning Policy Team
Newcastle Civic Centre
Barras Bridge
Newcastle upon Tyne
NE1 8PH
What will happen next?
The Council will carefully consider all the comments that are made during this
consultation period, and the alternative options that people suggest, along with
representations made at the previous stages. All comments received will be
summarised and reported in a consultation report which will be published
online. This will inform the production of the One Core Strategy and Urban
Core Area Action Plan Submission Draft Reports.
The Submission Draft Reports will be consulted on once complete. Following
this the Council will submit the Reports to the Secretary of State for public
examination. A Public Enquiry will follow.
2
1
May 2012
BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT
Councils have a duty to ensure a deliverable supply of sites for housing across
their local authority area. This is set out in the National Planning Policy
Framework. The quantity required is linked to population projections provided
by the Office of National Statistics, economic growth projections and evidence
on housing need identified through our Strategic Housing Market Assessment
(SHMA).
In order to support the projected economic growth without over reliance on
unsustainable in-commuting, our main objective is to maintain our working age
population at 2011 levels. These levels are currently estimates but will be
confirmed in July 2012 when the 2011 Census initial figures are published.
All local authorities are required to maintain an annually updated Strategic
Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA), to illustrate that there is an
adequate supply of sites.
Our 2010 Assessments highlighted a significant shortfall of available and
deliverable housing sites within our urban area and we were not able to
demonstrate that there were adequate sites to meet our future needs.
This necessitated us looking at sites that had previously been discounted,
including some potential sites that are currently in the Green Belt. This aspect
was reported in our Draft One Core Strategy which we consulted on in January
2011.
During 2010 and 2011 we updated the SHLAA by revisiting discounted sites
and commenced a Strategic Land Review, to examine whether there were sites
outside the urban area (in the Green Belt) that could be developed for housing
over the next 20 years. Whilst it is acknowledged that any such release will
result in the loss of some land from the Green Belt, a major consideration in the
evaluation of these sites was to ensure that the release would not have an
unacceptable negative impact on the purposes of Green Belt as set out by
Government guidance.
The Review identified 30 or so sites in Newcastle with a capacity in the order of
11,000 homes. It was estimated that up to 7,500 homes could be built on these
sites up to 2030.
As part of the most recent round of consultations on the One Core Strategy
(October 2011 to January 2012) we tested public opinion on the future
development of these sites. This generated much debate and a clear message
that we should do more to bring forward more sites in the urban area first and
look only to Green Belt sites thereafter.
We were very conscious of this in the 2011 review of our SHLAA and have
looked for additional housing sites, regardless of their current allocation, and at
ways of improving the deliverability of some sites previously identified as longterm, with a view to bringing forward delivery within the plan period.
3
May 2012
To this end Newcastle City Council have set up a dedicated Fairer Housing Unit
and identified additional funding for housing projects in the city (See Future
Housing Cabinet Report 28.2.12). These added measures have enabled us to
assume the deliverability of a further 2000 homes within the urban area of
Newcastle including regeneration schemes, bringing forward conversions in
Grainger Town and Housing development at Newburn Riverside. Further work
with the Fairer Housing Unit is required to ensure that we can indeed deliver
these within the anticipated timescales.
Identifying adequate sites to deliver the total number of dwellings required is
only half of the equation. The new housing offer in Newcastle for family type
homes has fallen well short of demand in recent years and this has resulted in
increased in-commuting as families move further away from their employment,
to find appropriate homes.
In order to maintain our working age population to 2030, need to redress this
imbalance. We therefore looked carefully at how we can provide for more
family homes over the Plan period. Not all sites in the existing urban area are
suitable or desirable for such development but in Newcastle we probably have
the capacity for 5000-6000 family homes.
Since we began this process the Office for National Statistics have published
their 2010 population projections. The revised projection suggests that we will
still achieve a joint population of around 500,000 people (297,800 in Newcastle
and 202,100 in Gateshead) but that rather than a growth in our working age
population we will experience a decline, 7,400 fewer working age people (5,800 in Newcastle and -1,600 in Gateshead). This is clearly a worry for our
Working City and sustainable economic growth commitments. However, this
new population projection needs to be considered alongside all other available
evidence including our Economic Growth Projections. In revising the plans we
will need to put in place policies that ensure that we at least maintain our
working age population at current levels.
These revised population projections and the interventions we need to maintain
our working age population may have some impact on the absolute number of
new homes we are planning for. In order to provide enough homes for our
growing population plus the additional 5,800 working age people and their
families we are aiming to retain we can assume that there might be some
reduction in the overall housing needs numbers as set out in the Draft Plan.
But, the yet to be released 2011 Census figures and new Household
Projections anticipated in Autumn 2012 may also affect the actual final number
of new houses needed and so we are not proposing to finalise these figures
until this information is all available.
However, it is still anticipated that we will need to build homes in the Green Belt
to provide for the range and type of homes needed to satisfy the demands of
our population. It is within this context that we have finalised this second part of
our Strategic Land Review.
4
May 2012
This second stage of the Strategic Land Review has discounted and reduced
the size of some of the sites proposed through the first report. The sites that
remain have the capacity to accommodate in the order of 6000 new homes.
A major aim of the One Core Strategy (and Government guidance) is to direct
new developments to sustainable locations to reduce the need to travel,
especially by private car. The majority of development will be located in areas
close to existing facilities and shops and to transport hubs and bus routes.
A key sustainability factor assessed is access to, and capacity within, local
schools. Sites within a walkable distance to a local school for primary age
pupils helps foster a sustainable community, particularly when combined with
other local facilities. The capacity of schools is also of critical importance, as we
need to make the best use of existing school capacity where possible. This will
support our existing neighbourhoods and villages maintaining their facilities and
services into the future and ensure their long term sustainability.
We are also keen to ensure that the larger sites, when developed, will be able
to mitigate any of the impacts they may have on existing infrastructure, ecology,
including impact on protected sites, access to the countryside, etc.
With this in mind we have undertaken a further assessment of the “suitable”
Green Belt sites identified in the 2011 SLR. The detailed method for doing so
was approved by Cabinet in February 2012 and published on our website for
comment. It has been amended in minor ways to take account of the
comments raised as a result of this.
We are now consulting on the conclusions of this additional and more detailed
assessment work. It was hoped that we would be able to say what sites we
propose to allocate for housing development within the plan period and what
sites we are proposing to safeguard for development after 2030. However, as
explained above we are waiting for the 2011 Census figures to be released and
for some further assessment of our evidence base to be complete before we
finalise actual housing numbers for the Core Strategy and hence actual sites.
5
May 2012
2 METHOD AND APPROACH
In 2010 our evidence indicated that we did not have adequate sites within the
established urban areas, suitable to deliver the required housing numbers and
mix to cater for the projected increase in the number of households. This
resulted in the NewcastleGateshead Strategic Land Review and Green Belt
Assessment 2010-30, where we assessed all parcels of land in the Green Belt
against the extent to which each fulfilled the purposes of Green Belt defined by
PPG2 (this definition remains valid as it has been restated in the National
Planning Policy Framework). This was required to establish their potential as
prospective housing sites. We consulted on the outcome of this review
alongside the draft One Core Strategy from October 2011.
As highlighted above we are reviewing and updating our evidence, to provide a
robust estimate of the number of houses we need to plan for.
This methodology enables us to highlight the relative merits and constraints of
each of the assessed sites and therefore make recommendations about which
should be identified as Growth Areas in the One Core Strategy.
Local opinion is important and the issues raised through the consultation will be
addressed in the assessment process. As required by the planning process, the
analyses of the consultation responses have primarily been qualitative, rather
than quantitative. Whilst it is not possible to use a particular threshold of support
or opposition to dismiss a site, we have used views expressed to inform the
review process.
The further evaluation of the sites we originally consulted on (October 2011January 2012) contained in this report has been based on the methodology
described below.
A. Consultation responses – Listen to what you have to say


Analyse the responses and address the issues raised in the evaluation; this
will be done on a site by site basis, where the submission allow us to do so:

Identify issues that could affect our initial scoring in the September SLR

Additional identified issues that could affect suitability, including
environmental character

Identify issues that affect accessibility

Identify issues of deliverability
Explain why some issues raised during the consultation cannot be
considered within the planning system.
6
May 2012
B. Strategic Land Review and Green Belt Assessment update
Update of the SLR-GBA assessment of the site as required:

Based on comments received and issues raised during the consultation

Identify how sites will be grouped and explain why

Update the SLR-GBA (through an addendum), to reflect outcomes.
C. Suitability – in terms of physical constraints, flood risk, physical form,
contamination, slope, access and traffic generation as well as environmental
character which will also include local character, quality of landscape, habitat
value. This section also looks at whether mitigation can overcome any of the
identified issues.
D. Sustainable accessibility Looks at proximity of the site to key local facilities
and services – in terms of the ability to access a range of services and facilities.
We look at access to local facilities and services, education, regional shopping
and employment. The scoring mechanism acknowledges that facilities within
walking distance contribute better to bringing residents together. It is
acknowledged that the scoring system cannot provide a definite filter for sites,
but it will provide a valuable evaluation tool for the relative merit of the identified
sites in terms of accessibility that can then be taken forward in the final analysis
(section F).
E. Deliverability Looks at whether the site will be available for development
and is it likely to generate developer interest; can the site deliver what we need
to achieve and is development likely to be viable within the plan period?
F. Analysis and Conclusions – This section analyses issues identified in the
evaluation and draws conclusions for the site. It should be noted that only part
of the analysis is scored but all elements of the analysis will be considered in
writing these conclusions.
The methodology is in line with the National Planning Policy Framework and the
considerations applied through our Strategic Housing Land Availability
Assessments.
On completion our consultants, Natural Capital, will asses our evaluations,
using the agreed sustainability appraisal criteria established for LDF. These
findings will inform how this assessment work will inform the Core Strategy.
It is felt that the combination of our evaluation, together with the sustainability
appraisal will provide a good indication of the sustainability of the proposed
sites.
Our assessment of sites is summarised in Section 4 of this report and the
detailed appraisals are contained in the appendix.
7
May 2012
3 KEY ASSUMPTIONS
3.1 Approach to estimating site capacity
The housing yield of a site is a function of two factors:

The site area and in particular the net site area (as in many instances not all
of the site will be developed for housing).

Density (i.e. the number of dwellings per hectare).
Gross to net site area
On smaller sites the gross and net site areas will often be the same but larger
sites generally contain other uses such as retail, leisure, education and strategic
open space, which can significantly reduce the area available for housing.
The “Tyne & Wear Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessments (SHLAA)
Sub-Regional Addendum Concept Paper and Supplementary Guidance
(Revised July 2008)” sets out assumptions that sites of less than 0.4 ha will
have a net to gross ratio of 100%, sites of 0.4 to 2 hectares will have a ratio of
90% and sites of more than 2 hectares will have a ratio of 75%.
These ratios have been used as a starting point for the SLR assessments,
however clearly these are broad brush assumptions. They are not as reliable
as a calculation based upon a detailed master planning exercise or a site-bysite estimate taking into account specific constraints (such as topographical
features, noise-emitting uses etc). Where available information supports the
use of a different ratio assumption then a suitable alternative assumption has
been made.
3.2 Assumed Densities
It has long been an objective of the planning system to make best use of land,
both to minimise land take and to help to support more sustainable travel
patterns. However, it is also important to ensure that the density of
development is appropriate to identified needs and demands. Paragraph 47 of
the Government’s National Planning Policy Framework states: “To boost
significantly the supply of housing… local planning authorities should set out
their own approach to housing density to reflect local circumstances.”
In this instance the primary reason for looking to sites in the Green Belt to
accommodate some of the City’s future development is to help to address a
severe shortfall in the supply of sites for ‘family’ houses with gardens. These
are generally built at lower densities than other types of housing, particularly
larger, detached houses. The Strategic Housing Market Assessment identifies
a significant under-supply of this property type, with much of the housing stock
comprising of small, high density flats and terraces. This is in marked contrast
to many of the estates constructed in surrounding authorities in recent decades,
and which have facilitated large scale out-migration of families.
8
May 2012
If the City is to compete effectively with other parts of the wider family housing
market then it is inevitable that a significant element of detached housing will be
required.
An appropriate balance is required between the potentially competing interests
of making best use of land and meeting the identified need for family housing.
This can best be achieved by developing major new housing areas as ‘Lifetime
Neighbourhoods’ according to a ‘density gradient’. In the illustration below
approximately 2,000 houses (including 75% family-sized houses) can be
accommodated within a 500 metre radius of the centre of a notional
neighbourhood, at an overall density of around 30 dwellings per hectare. A
cluster of high density houses and apartments around a hub of key services not
only provides a critical mass of core demand to support quality services but also
affords high levels of accessibility to services for households with more limited
mobility. Meanwhile, the density of surrounding housing declines with distance
from the centre, with low-density family homes located towards the periphery of
the neighbourhood.
Illustration of Density Gradient
Distance to
centre (m)
– as crow
flies
0 -100
Gross
area
(ha.)
Net
area
(ha.)
Density
(dph)
3.1
Gross
to net
housing
ratio
64%
2.0
100
100-200
9.4
64%
6.0
50
200-300
15.7
85%
13.3
37.5
300-400
22.0
91%
20.0
27.5
400-500
28.3
91%
25.7
17.5
0-500
79
85%
67
30
Development mix
Local facilities; doorstep
open spaces; older
persons' and specialist
accommodation, general
market flats
Starter homes, older
persons' accommodation,
primary school (2 form
entry), open space
Medium density family
homes (3 bed terraced &
semis); primary school,
open space
Low to medium density
family homes (3 & 4 bed
semis & detached);
neighbourhood park
Low density family homes
(4+ bed detached);
neighbourhood park
Total
In most instances the Strategic Land Review sites under consideration are not
of sufficient scale in themselves to provide the opportunity to create complete
neighbourhoods but rather have the potential to fill in some of the gaps in
provision in existing neighbourhoods and to contribute to meeting supply
deficiencies Citywide: notably by providing medium and lower density family
9
Housing
capacity
200
300
500
550
450
2000
May 2012
homes. As such the assumed density in most instances is slightly lower than
30 dwellings per hectare. Notable exceptions are the Callerton sites, where
new local centres are proposed and thus are well-placed to provide for the
development of Lifetime Neighbourhoods. In addition it is assumed that the
density of family homes on sites at Kingston Park / Kenton Bank Foot will be
slightly higher than elsewhere to take advantage of good public transport (bus
and Metro) accessibility.
3.3 Approach to estimating build rates
The build rate (outturn) of a site is essentially dictated by the rate of sales that
can be achieved and this depends upon a large number of factors: the scale of
demand within the wider housing market, the physical capacity of the
homebuilder, the type and variety of products, pricing, competition from other
properties for sale, mortgage availability etc.
It is generally the case that the larger the site, the higher the number of
separate sales outlets and the greater the number of developers is then the
higher the overall build rate is likely to be. However, doubling the size, the
number of outlets or the number of developers will not normally lead to a
doubling of the build rate (law of diminishing returns applies). Ultimately, there
will be a finite number of purchasers able and willing to purchase properties in
any particular geographic location irrespective of the degree of range and
choice of product that can be made available.
The following table illustrates the build rates achieved by major private housing
developments (excluding those consisting mainly of apartments) in the City
since 1980. That these are few in number is an illustration of the lack of family
houses built in the City over this period. Notwithstanding this lack averaged
around 50 per annum. This is considered to be a realistic build rate to apply to
Strategic Land Review sites of this size.
10
May 2012
Of housing developments in the City over the past 30 years only Newcastle
Great Park exceeds 500 units, split over a number of development cells or
‘outlets’. Great Park has permission for 2,500 homes and potential for more
than double this number. It has been under development for around 10 years,
at an average build rate of 115 per annum up to April 2012. For a variety of
reasons this is a lower build rate than was originally envisaged but the
developers are now seeking to appeal to a broader market and ensure that at
least 3 different outlets are being developed concurrently. They advise that,
over the next couple of years, the build rate is expected to increase towards 200
per annum and be sustained at that level. This is considered to be a realistic
build rate for (a minimum of) two of the country’s largest homebuilders to
achieve within the local housing market.
The following table provides a broad indication of likely maximum average build
rates in the Newcastle housing market area. This has been used to inform
consideration of the deliverability of SLR sites.
Indicative Build Rates on SLR Sites
Site size
<100 1
100-500 1
500+
1000+
2500+
No. of
outlets
No. of
developers
Sales per developer
per outlet per month
Average build rate
(per annum)
1
1
2.9
4.2
4.6
3.1
2.5
2.1
4.2
2.9
2.3
1.9
3.9
2.8
2.3
1.9
35
50
55
75
90
100
100
140
165
185
140
200
250
275
11
12
13
14
21
22
23
24
31
32
33
34
NOTE: These assumptions have been challenged by the representatives of
Northumberland Estates and Bellway. It is their view that an average annual
build rate of around 600 per annum could be achieved by 4 developers across
three outlets at Callerton Park. This is more than twice the rate identified in the
table above and there is no evidence that such a rate is achievable in the local
housing market. While it may be achievable in some housing growth areas of
the South-East (where demand for new homes is far stronger), rates of
development within the local housing market on large sites such as the Great
Park noted above and in North Tyneside and Cramlington have been
substantially lower than this.
11
May 2012
3.4 Residential values
A key component of the assessment of whether a site is deliverable is viability.
A detailed Viability Assessment has been prepared to examine the capacity of a
variety of theoretical developments in each of five residential value areas
identified for the city. This has been prepared primarily to support the
development of the Community Infrastructure Levy [CIL]. However, this not
only informs the establishment of a CIL but also the development of affordable
housing policy and, importantly, whether sites being considered in the Strategic
Housing Land Availability Assessment [SHLAA] and the Strategic Land Review
are likely to be viable for housing development without subsidy.
The five residential value areas are illustrated Figure 1. The following table sets
out assumed sales values for standard property types in each of the five areas.
All of the sites under consideration in the Strategic Land Review have been
assessed as falling within the mid-value or (mostly) high-mid value areas. The
Viability Assessment shows that, on the basis of standard assumptions, all of
the SLR sites are likely to be viable for housing development. However, only
sites in the high-mid value areas are shown to be capable of contributing
significantly to meeting the costs of new strategic infrastructure.
Value area
High
Per square foot
£230 £195 £167 £132 £111
Per square metre
High Mid
Mid
Low Mid
Low
£2,476 £2,099 £1,798 £1,421 £1,195
1 bed flat
45sqm
£115,000
£95,000 £80,00
0 £65,00
2 bed flat
60sqm
£155,000
£127,500 £105,0
00
£85,000
£70,000
2 bed house
60sqm
£157,500
£130,000 £107,5
00
£87,500
£72,500
2 bed bungalow
60sqm
£160,000
£135,000
£110,000
£90,000
£75,000
3 bed house (small)
70sqm
£180,000 £150,0
00 £127,5
00 £105,0
00
£85,000
3 bed house (med)
80sqm
£200,000 £170,0
00 £145,0
00 £115,0
00
£95,000
3 bed house (large)
90sqm
£220,000 £185,0
00 £157,5
00 £125,0
00 £105,0
00
4 bed house
115sqm
£280,000 £235,0
00 £195,0
00 £160,0
00 £130,0
00
4/5 bed house (large)
150sqm
£360,000 £300,0
00 £250,0
00 £190,0
00 £150,0
00
12
0 £55,00
0
May 2012
FIGURE 1
13
May 2012
4 SUMMARY OF KEY RECOMMENDATIONS
4.1 Introduction
This report has reassessed sites in the Green Belt for their potential for being
included as either Neighbourhood Growth Areas or Village Growth Area in the
One Core Strategy. As noted above work is still ongoing to finalise actual
numbers and therefore actual sites for inclusion in our future land supply.
However, at this stage we are able to make some key recommendations based
on this further assessment work and illustrate what the likely build rates would
be if all of the recommendations were taken up.
4.2 Neighbourhood Growth Areas
4.2.1 Callerton Park
Recommend that there is a reduction in scale of the previously proposed
‘Callerton Park’ from 4000 homes by 2030 (and 6,500 overall) to 3,000 in three
separate ‘neighbourhood growth areas’: 1,200 at Upper Callerton (southeastern part of 4668); 1,000 at Middle Callerton (sites 4603 & 4958); and 800 at
Lower Callerton (southern part of 4813).
Recommend that the remainder of site 4668, site 4941, site 4957 and the
northern part of 4813 are reviewed in the context of Government requirements
for looking beyond the plan period.
4.2.2 Lemington
Recommend discounting Lemington as a proposed ‘neighbourhood growth
area’ (sites 4816 and 4946) on grounds of impact on Scheduled Ancient
Monument and its setting; and, lack of satisfactory vehicular access.
4.2.3 Newbiggin Hall
Recommend that Newbiggin Hall could be identified as a ‘neighbourhood
growth area’ of approximately 400 homes(comprising of sites 4828, 4948 and
new site 4950).
4.2.4 Kingston Park & Kenton Bank Foot
Recommend that Kingston Park / Kenton Bank Foot could be identified as a
‘neighbourhood growth area’ for approximately 850 homes. (comprising of sites
4661, 4662, 4819, 4820, 4930, 4951, 5047, 4663, 4949 & 4961).
4.2.5 North Gosforth
Recommend that North Gosforth could be identified as a ‘neighbourhood growth
area’ for approximately 100 homes (comprising of sites 4665 & 4706)
4.2.6 Newcastle Great Park
Recommend that part of site 4959 (as extended) to the west of Newcastle Great
Park could be identified as a ‘neighbourhood growth area’ for approximately 500
homes.
14
May 2012
Recommend that the remainder of site 4959 is reviewed in the context of
Government requirements for looking beyond the plan period.
4.2.7 Salters Lane
Recommend discounting Salters Lane as a proposed ‘neighbourhood growth
area’ (sites 4667 & 4926) on grounds proximity to a Site of Special Scientific
Interest.
4.3 Village Growth Areas
4.3.1 Dinnington
Recommend that Dinnington could be identified as a ‘village growth area’ with
land to north-west of for approximately 250 homes (sites 4657 & 4815). But,
given that to develop all sites around Dinnington would mean a quantum of
development out of scale with the village recommend discounting land to southwest (site 4814) on grounds that it is less accessible and subject to greater
aircraft noise.
4.3.2 Wideopen
Recommend that Wideopen could be identified as a ‘village growth area’ with
land to south-east (site 4707) for approximately 80 homes
4.3.3 Hazlerigg
Recommend that Hazlerigg could be considered as a ‘village growth area’ with
land to west (site 4936) for approximately 400 homes.
4.3.4 Woolsington
Recommend that Woolsington (site 4924) is discounted as a ‘village growth
area’ on grounds of lack of the local services needed for it to be considered a
sustainable location for significant housing growth.
4.3.5 Throckley
Recommend that Throckley could be identified as a ‘village growth area’ with
land to north-west (sites 4944 & 4945) for approximately 530 homes and land to
south-east (site 4947) for approximately 70 homes
4.3.6 Walbottle
Recommend that Walbottle could be identified as a ‘village growth area’ with
land to the west (site 4672) for approximately 60 homes
4.3.7 Newburn
Recommend discounting Newburn as a proposed ‘village growth area’ due to
lack of deliverable sites.
15
May 2012
4.4 Illustration of Potential Build Rates
Based on the taking up of the recommendations set out above the following
build rates could, we judge, be achieved on each of the identified sites. It
should be noted that this in no way constitutes a phasing plan and that most
sites would not be in a position to begin on site until 2017 at the earliest.
Figures 2 – 14 illustrate our assumptions about areas of build within each of the
“recommended” sites.
Area
Sites
2015-20 2020-25 2025-30 Total
Upper Callerton
4668
(part of)
200 500
500
1200
Middle Callerton
4958
4603
225 400
375
1000
Lower Callerton
4813
(part of)
50 375
375
800
Newbiggin Hall
4828
4948
4950
100 200
100
400
Kingston Park/
Kenton Bank Foot
4661
4662
4663
4819
4820
4930
4949
4951
4961
5047
225 375
250
850
North Gosforth
4665
4706
100 _
_
100
Newcastle Great Park
4959
(part of)
_ 125
375
500
1975
4850
_
250
Sub-total: URBAN SITES
900
Dinnington 4657
1975
100 150
4815
Wideopen 4707
80
_
_
80
Hazlerigg 4936
50
250
100
400
250
600
100 250
Throckley 4944
4945
4947
Walbottle 4672
60
_
_
60
Sub-total: VILLAGE SITES
390
650
350
1390
TOTAL
1290
2625
2325
6240
16
FIGURE 2 : UPPER CALLERTON
4668
KEY
golf course
primary school
GP surgery
existing housing
potential development area
road network
800m from site edge
potential site access
existing trees/tree buffer
pedestrian route
metro line
metro station
possible alignment of proposed bypass
safeguarded land
for discussion purposes only (not to scale)
SIMONSIDE
PRIMARY SCHOOL
5-10min walk from south of site
FIGURE 3 : MIDDLE CALLERTON
4958
4603
SIMONSIDE
PRIMARY SCHOOL
20-30min walk
KEY
primary school
community facility
golf course
landscaping
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
bus stop
topography
WESTERHOPE
PRIMARY SCHOOL
10-30min walk
FIGURE 4 : LOWER CALLERTON
4813
KEY
local service
primary school
MILECASTLE
PRIMARY SCHOOL
15min walk
landscaping
existing housing
WALBOTTLE CAMPUS
10-30min walk
road network
800m from site edge
bus stop
topography
safeguarded land
ST CUTHBERT’S RC
PRIMARY SCHOOL
10-15min walk
WALBOTTLE VILLAGE
PRIMARY SCHOOL
10-15min walk
KNOPLAW
PRIMARY SCHOOL
15min walk
FIGURE 5 : NEWBIGGIN HALL
4948 4950
4828
KEY
SIMONSIDE
PRIMARY SCHOOL
10-15min walk
primary school
GP surgery
secondary school
local service
industry
landscaping
existing housing
playing f eld
allotments
road network
800m from site edge
ST MARKS RC
PRIMARY SCHOOL
20min walk
CHEVIOT
PRIMARY SCHOOL
10-15min walk
topography
bus stop
FARNE
PRIMARY SCHOOL
20min walk
ALL SAINTS
COLLEGE
10-15min walk
FIGURE 6 : KINGSTON PARK AND KENTON BANK FOOT
5047
4961 46614819
4662
4663
4949
4930
KINGSTON PARK
PRIMARY SCHOOL
5-20min walk
KEY
secondary school
primary school
local service
industrial area
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
playing f eld
bus stop
metro line
metro station
topography
KENTON
SECONDARY SCHOOL
30-35min walk
4951
4820
FIGURE 7 : NORTH GOSFORTH
4706
4665
KEY
primary school
GP surgery
local service
cemetary
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
bus stop
BRUNTON
FIRST SCHOOL
15min walk
FIGURE 8 : NEWCASTLE GREAT PARK
4959
KEY
existing housing
off ces
playing f eld
road network
800m from site edge
housing sites
possible location of new school
BRUNTON
FIRST SCHOOL
20min walk
FIGURE 9 : DINNINGTON
4815
4657
4814
DINNINGTON FIRST SCHOOL
10-15min walk
KEY
area subject to aircraft noise
primary school
playing f eld
GP surgery
local service
cemetary
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
bus stop
FIGURE 10 : WIDEOPEN
HAZLEWOOD
PRIMARY SCHOOL
15-20min walk
KEY
primary school
local service
landscaping
graveyard
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
bus stop
4707
FIGURE 11 : HAZLERIGG
4936
HAZLEWOOD
PRIMARY SCHOOL
20min walk
KEY
primary school
industrial area
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
archaeological site
allotments
playing f eld
FIGURE 12 : THROCKLEY (NORTH)
4944
4945
KEY
primary school
secondary school
industrial area
local service
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
bus stop
pedestrian route
THROCKLEY
PRIMARY SCHOOL
5-15min walk
WALBOTTLE
CAMPUS
15-20min walk
FIGURE 13 : THROCKLEY SOUTH
THROCKLEY
PRIMARY SCHOOL
20min walk
4947
WALBOTTLE
CAMPUS
15-20min walk
KEY
primary school
secondary school
allotments
community facility
local service
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
bus stop
NEWBURN MANOR
PRIMARY SCHOOL
10min walk
FIGURE 14 : WALBOTTLE
WALBOTTLE CAMPUS
5 min walk
4672
WALBOTTLE VILLAGE
PRIMARY SCHOOL
5 min walk
KEY
primary school
secondary school
allotments
archaeology
local service
existing housing
road network
800m from site edge
topography
May 2012
APPENDIX : DETAILED SITE APPRAISALS
18
May 2012
NEIGHBOURHOOD GROWTH AREAS
1. MIDDLE & UPPER CALLERTON
Site refs:
4603, 4668, 4941, 4957 & 4958
Address:
Land north of Newbiggin Hall and Chapel
Park, between Stamfordham Road and A696
Ownership:
Northumberland Estates / Bellway / O’Neil
/ various
Site area:
258 ha (gross) / 184 ha. (net)
Estimated capacity:
Approx. 4,600 homes
A. Issues Raised Through Consultation
These sites form the northern part of the proposed Strategic Growth Area of
Callerton Park. A total of 368 individual submissions and 3 petitions with 6,700
signatures have been received in opposition to housing development in the
Green Belt in this location. The majority of these objected to the proposed
identification of Callerton Park as a Strategic Growth Area under policy CS2 of
the Core Strategy.
A significant proportion of respondents commended that they would rather
brownfield sites be developed before Green Belt or empty properties be brought
back into use. This is a general objection to any Green Belt sites being
delivered.
Specific objections were raised by respondents to development at Callerton
Park on the grounds that it will:

Have an adverse impact on wildlife.

Result in loss of recreation amenity.

Have a significant impact on the existing road network and increase
congestion significantly, whilst putting existing services, infrastructure and
facilities under pressure.
 Increase
pollution.

Have a detrimental impact on village/local character and identity.

Increase risk in the Ouseburn Catchment Area.

Narrow the greenbelt to within 1 kilometre of both Darras Hall and Heddon
on the Wall.

Increase traffic and congestion on the A69, B6918 and A1.
19

May 2012
potentially be required for coal extraction (being adjacent to a former coal
extraction site).
The above points will be addressed as relevant throughout the assessment.
However, it should be noted that while the priority is for making best use of
existing brownfield sites before releasing greenfield sites we need to establish
where the best sites for Green Belt release are in anticipation that there remains
a major shortfall in the supply of deliverable sites in the short term and beyond
particularly in respect of sites for mid-market family houses.
B. Green Belt Assessment
In combination these sites scored 19 out of a possible 25, indicating some harm
to Green Belt purposes. However, it is considered that this would be
outweighed if there was an overriding need for homes.
Consideration
Coalescence
Countryside
encroachment
Urban regeneration
Historic towns
Urban sprawl
Comment
Would reduce strategic gap between Newcastle and
Ponteland to 2.5km (and not 1km); would also reduce
gap with airport to approx. 600m. No part of the sites is
within 4km of Heddon-on-the-Wall (not in any case a
‘protected’ gap).
5.87km of 12.38km perimeter of site touching area
outside of Green Belt = 47%
No demonstrable adverse impact on urban regeneration
No impact on setting or special character of Durham,
Hexham, Corbridge or Morpeth
5.87km of 12.38km perimeter of site touching area
Score
4/5
3/5
5/5
5/5
2/5
C. Suitability for housing
Wildlife
If the City’s requirement for new homes cannot be met within the existing urban
area some areas of countryside will be required. This has the potential to be
harmful to wildlife interests. However, through careful site selection, design and
mitigation measures, any adverse impacts can be minimised. Importantly,
these sites contain no areas designated for their national or local nature
conservation interest.
Recreation value
A bridleway separates site 4668 from site 4957 and also runs through the
eastern part of the site. To the south of site 4668, a public footpath links
Wharlton with Newbiggin Lane to the east. Sites 4603 and 4958 are separated
by a public footpath and a bridleway bisects site 4958. Although it will be
possible to retain footpaths and bridleways, development of surrounding land
would ultimately change their character from urban fringe countryside to a more
urban context. However, not all of the sites would be fully developed and there
20
May 2012
would be an opportunity to establish new recreation areas and routes as part of
an enhanced strategic network.
Flood risk
Minor parts of sites 4957 and 4958 are identified by the Environment Agency as
at risk from flooding and this can be easily addressed as part of the master
planning of the area (for instance: locating less vulnerable uses, such as open
spaces in these areas). The introduction of measures such as Sustainable
Urban Drainage Systems can help to manage surface water discharges into
watercourses and the sewerage network. There may also be scope for the
development of these sites to reduce the risk of the Ouse Burn causing
problems of flooding downstream of the sites by incorporating additional flood
storage capacity as part of the strategic open space network.
Topography
In terms of topography, all of the sites appear to be physically suitable for
housing development.

Site 4603 has a slight slope (approx.3%): 90m AOD to north rising to 105m
AOD to southern boundary with existing urban area.

Site 4668 has a slight slope (<2%): 65+m AOD towards northern boundary,
with steeper slope (approx. 7%) to southern boundary where site rises to
90m AOD.

Site 4941 has a slight slope (approx.2%): 80m AOD to north-west, rising to
90m AOD to south-east.

Site 4957 also has a slight slope (2%): 75m AOD to north-west, rising to
>90m AOD to south.

Finally, site 4958 has a slight slope (<2%): 65m to NE, rising to 80m to
south-east.
Site 4603 is particularly well-contained by existing landscape features,
particularly a shelterbelt to the north-western boundary. To the north and west
of the sites the Ouse Burn represents a strong and defensible Green Belt
boundary, as does the A696 to the north-east.
Minerals
Much of this land has already been the subject of opencast coal extraction and
further extraction is not understood to represent a constraint to housing
development. However, in some areas ground condition issues could impose
additional costs on development (ground compaction associated with the
restoration of previous coal extraction was on the basis of future use for
agriculture).
21
May 2012
Traffic & Access
Sites 4603 and 4958 both have road frontage with Stamfordham Road, and site
4603 has an existing access. Site 4668 has road frontage with Newbiggin Lane
in close proximity to the grade-separated junction with the A696.
Major improvements to the local and strategic highway network will be required
to unlock development of these sites. Discussions are ongoing between the
landowners’ transport consultants, the Council’s transport officers and the
Highways Agency with a view to identifying satisfactory transport solutions.
D. Accessibility
Proximity to Local Schools
Primary schools
Upper Callerton: Site 4668, at its southern edge, is 5 minutes walk from
Simonside Primary School (Newbiggin Hall) but the northern and western
extremities of the site are up to 25 minutes walk. The majority of homes if built
would be within a 15 minutes walk. The south-eastern edge of site 4668 is
within a 15 minutes walk of Cheviot Primary School and 20 minutes of Kingston
Park Primary School; the majority of homes if built would be within a 25 / 30
minutes walk.
Site 4957 is in excess of 25 minutes walk of the closest primary schools.
Middle Callerton: Site 4603, at its southern edge is 10 minutes walk from
Westerhope Primary school and the majority of homes if built would be within
15 minutes walk; the northern edge is also 15 minutes walk of Simonside
Primary (via a footpath through Westerhope Golf Course); the majority of
homes if built on sites 4941 and 4958 would be within a 25 minutes walk.
Secondary schools
Upper Callerton: All of the sites are located in excess of 30 minutes walk - and
15-36 minutes travel time by public transport - of All Saints College (West
Denton) and Walbottle Campus. Ponteland Middle and High Schools in
Northumberland are located some 5 to 7 kilometres from the sites.
Middle Callerton: The majority of homes if built on site 4603 would be within a
30 minutes walk of All Saints College and within a 45 minutes walk of Walbottle
Campus. Homes on site 4958 would be within a 30-45 minutes walk of both
schools. Both sites are within 10-15 minutes travel time by public transport of
these schools. Schools in Ponteland are located some 5 to 7 kilometres from
the sites.
22
May 2012
Capacity in Local Schools
Primary Schools
Upper Callerton: The overall scale of housing that could be developed at Upper
Callerton, at around 3,250 dwellings, could generate an additional 600-760
primary school pupils. There is significant spare capacity available at Simonside
Primary School and some limited capacity at more distant schools - such as
Cheviot Primary School. The proposed first phase of development of Upper
Callerton is on land to the south-east, closest to existing schools (the majority of
new homes within 10 minutes walk), and the demand for primary school places
arising from around 700 new homes could be accommodated by Simonside
Primary School, making best use (and maximising the viability) of existing
infrastructure.
The further development of Upper Callerton would require additional primary
school provision. An extension to Simonside Primary School from 1.5 to 2 form
entry could provide an additional 105 pupil places; this could cater for a further
500 additional new homes, mainly within a 15 minutes walk.
Longer term, to build out all 3,250 dwellings in total would generate additional
demand for 360-500 school places. A new two-form entry primary school is
likely to be required, which could be initially developed as a single-form entry
school and later extended to two-form entry. However, the alternative
possibility of further extending Simonside school could be explored.
Middle Callerton: The development of 1,350 dwellings on sites 4603, 4958 and
4941 could generate around an additional 240-320 primary school pupils. There
is some capacity available at Westerhope Primary School and further capacity
at more distant schools (Simonside, Milecastle and Knop Law), however these
are not within convenient walking distance.
Pupils generated by part development of site 4603 could be accommodated
within Westerhope Primary school. However, for the wider development of
Middle Callerton, a new single form entry primary school would need to be built
to establish a community based on sustainable travel patterns.
Secondary Schools
In terms of secondary school provision, development of all of the sites at Upper
Callerton and Middle Callerton could generate demand for up to 1,000 school
places. There is significant capacity available at Walbottle Campus and All
Saints College which is forecast to rise without additional local development to
boost its pupil roll.
Currently, just over half (52%) of pupils living in the Outer West attend schools
in the Outer West, with many attending schools outside of the City. However,
Ponteland Middle School (505 places) and Ponteland High school (1142) are
both thought to have less than 3% surplus places and so, without new
provision, schools in the Outer West can be expected to accommodate much of
the forecast growth in demand (either directly or indirectly).
23
May 2012
To conclude, the pupils generated from housing development of Upper
Callerton and Middle Callerton would support local primary and secondary
schools. Development should be phased in order to make best use of existing
capacity in appropriate sustainable local primary schools. Nevertheless, a new
single-form entry primary school is likely to be required in the medium term
(2020-25) to serve Middle Callerton. A further single-form entry primary school
to serve Upper Callerton towards the end of the Plan period, expandable to twoform entry post-2030 to cater for continued build out of Upper Callerton would
be required
Access to local convenience shopping
The majority of homes if built in first phases of the development of site 4668
would be within 15 minutes walk of the local centre at Newbiggin Hall. Sites
4603, 4958, 4957 and 4941 are all in excess of 15 minutes walk of a local
centre or convenience store.
Access to public transport
The south-eastern edge of site 4668 is within 800 metres (10 minutes walk) of
Kenton Bank Foot Metro Station but the overwhelming majority of the site is
significantly more distant (up to 2.4km / 30 minutes walk). Sites 4603 and 4941
are slightly more than 2.0km (25 minutes) walk from the nearest Metro station;
the remaining sites are all approximately 3.0km walk from the nearest Metro
station.
From a stop on the southern boundary of site 4603 bus service no.4 [Arriva]
provides a limited (9.40 until 3.40) hourly service to Metrocentre (46 minutes)
via West Denton District Centre (8 minutes). Bus service no. M71 is within 400
metres (5 minutes) walk of the southern edge of site 4668 and provides a halfhourly service between Newbiggin Hall and Kingston Park District Centre.
Accessibility scoring
The following tables provide an overview of the accessibility of the sites to
existing services and facilities and highlights where there is a need for
additional demand to enhance their viability. The scoring should be treated with
caution as, by their very nature, the majority of homes on larger sites are likely
to be more distant from facilities and services than smaller sites but are more
able to generate the critical and funding mass needed to support new and
improved facilities and services, which will greatly enhance accessibility.
In this particular instance, over time, the development of the Upper and Middle
Callerton sites would generate sufficient demand to support new education
provision, local centres and public transport services within ‘Lifetime
Neighbourhoods’. The relatively low scores currently attributed to the more
peripheral sites 4941, 4957 & 4958 will not be reflective of their eventual levels
of accessibility but rather suggest that these sites should be phased later in the
overall build programme, by which time the development of sites 4603 and 4668
will have begun to improve accessibility through generation of the critical mass
of demand and funding required for new services and facilities.
24
May 2012
Walking
Middle Callerton: Site 4603
Total score: 16.5
Cycle
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary school
(Westerhope Primary) (score 0-5 points)
16
XX
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary school (All
Saints) (score 0-5 points)
26
8
D2 (a) - Walking time to defined district/local centre
(Westerhope) or supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to
convenience store (score 0-3 points)
24
XX
D2 (b) - Majority of homes within 10 minutes walk of
facilities
No X
Walking time to Metro Station / Local Rail Station with
frequent service / Express bus stop (score 0-5 points)
or to local bus service stop (score 0-3 points)
D4 - Travel time to nearest 5,000 jobs (score 0-10);
or time to nearest 1,000 jobs (score 0-6)
D5 - Travel time to Central Newcastle (score 0-5)
D6 - Would housing development enhance viability of
local facilities and services?
45 (M) 32
(E)
5 (L)
17 4
XX
3
/
18 /
<12
4
30
21
1
Cycle
13
XX
34
10
(Newbiggin Hall) or supermarket (score 0-5 points)
or to convenience store (score 0-3 points)
13
XX
facilities
No X
18 (M)
28 (E)
16 (L)
Public
transport
Score
26 4
3
X
XX
0
0
> 28
13 /
9
<25 /
16
105
(8km)
30
36 0
25
2.5
3
0
8
(Simonside) (score 0-5 points)
0
Yes – All Saints College
Walking
Upper Callerton: Site 4668
Total score: 19.5
Score
2
X
>25 14
105
(8km)
Public
transport
Yes – Simonside Primary, All
Saints College & Newbiggin
Hall Centre
2
7.5
May 2012
Walking
Total score: 13
Cycle
17
XX
33
10
(Newbiggin Hall/Westerhope) or supermarket
(score 0-5 points) or to convenience store (score 0-3
points)
25 / 30
facilities
No X
50(M)
24(E)
16(L)
Public
transport
2
<25 4
XX
0
X
XX
> 23
15 /
9
110
(8km)
>30 29
0
0
<25 /
<20
2
0
Saints College
Upper Callerton: Site 4957
Total score: 3
Walking
Cycle
Score
5
Public
transport
Score
X
0
40 X
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary school
(All Saints) (score 0-5 points)
45
(Newbiggin Hall) or supermarket (score 0-5 points)
or to convenience store (score 0-3 points)
30 X
X
0
facilities
No X
X
0
Walking time to Metro Station / Local Rail Station
with frequent service / Express bus stop (score 0-5
points) or to local bus service stop (score 0-3 points)
30 (M)
n/a (E)
27 (L)
> 30 /
>30
18 /
15
120
(10km)
>35 45
D6 - Would housing development enhance viability
of local facilities and services?
26
13
43 3
XX
0
>30 /
>30
No (due to distance /
likely timescale)
0
0
0
Total score: 10.5
May 2012
Walking
Cycle
Public
transport
Score
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary
school (Westerhope) (score 0-5 points)
25
XX
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary
school (All Saints) (score 0-5 points)
35
10
D2 (a) - Walking time to defined district/local
centre (Westerhope) or supermarket (score
0-5 points) or to convenience store (score 0-3
points)
32 X
X
0
D2 (b) - Majority of homes within 10 minutes
walk of facilities
No X
X
0
Walking time to Metro Station / Local Rail
Station with frequent service / Express bus
stop (score 0-5 points) or to local bus service
stop (score 0-3 points)
50 (M)
19 (E)
15 (L)
D4 - Travel time to nearest 5,000 jobs (score
0-10); or time to nearest 1,000 jobs (score 06)
> 25 /
>25
D5 - Travel time to Central Newcastle (score
0-5)
100 30
D6 - Would housing development enhance
viability of local facilities and services?
1
26 4
XX
16 /
11
1
25 /
19
2
28
0
2.5
E. Deliverability
Availability
The landowners of sites 4603, 4668, 4957 & 4958 are understood to be strongly
supportive of housing development at the earliest opportunity. Site 4941 is in a
number of separate ownerships and the landowners’ aspirations have not been
established.
Housing mix
The sites are well-placed to make a major contribution to meeting any unmet
need for family houses, including larger detached houses within the context of
building a Lifetime Neighbourhood with a wide mix of housing options. A
suitable mix could include 40-50% larger, upper market and upper mid-market
homes (typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed homes), 20-30% mid-market homes
(typically smaller and medium–sized 3-bed homes) and 20-30% higher density,
lower cost market and affordable homes (including 2-bed bungalows).
Viability
The site lies in a high mid value area where new homes can be expected to sell
(at current prices) for around £195 per square foot – i.e. approximately £150k to
£180k for a 3-bed house and £200k+ for a larger property. Based on the
27
May 2012
findings of the Council’s Viability Assessment housing development of these
sites would be viable even assuming a sizeable financial contribution to the
major infrastructure required to support the development.
Timescales
Assuming that, prior to planning permission being granted, the sites are first
removed from the Green Belt and allocated for housing thorough the
Development Plan and allowing for typical lead-in times, construction could
begin in 2017 (or thereabouts), commencing with site 4603. Assuming 2
developers on the Middle Callerton sites (4603 & 4958) then an average build
rate of around 75 per annum could be achieved – with site 4603 being fully built
out by around 2025 and two-thirds of site 4958 by 2030 (1000 homes in total).
Assuming up to 4 developers on the Upper Callerton site 4668 then an average
build rate of 100 per annum could be achieved and perhaps a total of 1,200 by
2030. This would equate to less than half of site 4668, with further expansion
onto site 4958 unlikely to be required until well beyond 2030.
F. Conclusion & recommendation
Altogether these sites have the physical capacity to accommodate up to 4800
homes in sustainable Lifetime Neighbourhoods and without causing
unacceptable harm to Green Belt purposes or other interests. A realistic
estimate is that around 2,200 of these could be constructed within the Plan
period (up to 2030), across two separate development areas: Upper Callerton
(1,200 homes) and Middle Callerton (1,000 homes).
Consideration should be given to allocating the first phases of Upper Callerton
(eastern part of site 4668) and Middle Callerton (sites 4603 & 4958) for housing
development by 2030. Meanwhile, the northern and western parts of site 4668,
site 4957 and site 4941 could be considered for identification as ’safeguarded
land’. This could be allocated for development in a future review of the
Development Plan if supported by firm evidence of a lack of more suitable
alternative sites to meet the identified requirement for new homes. The Ouse
Burn, proposed new bypass and the A696 would form strong and defensible
long-term Green Belt boundaries in this location.
28
May 2012
2. LOWER CALLERTON
Site ref:
4813
Land to west of North Walbottle Road and north of
A69
Address:
Ownership:
Northumberland
Site area (gross):
Estates
91.8 ha.
Estimated capacity: 2,200
A. Issues raised through consultation
The site forms the south-western part of the proposed Strategic Growth Area of
Callerton Park. A total of 368 individual submissions and 3 petitions with 6700
signatures have been received in opposition to housing development in the
Green Belt in this location. The majority of these objected to the proposed
identification of Callerton Park as a Strategic Growth Area under policy CS2 of
the Core Strategy.
Specific objections were raised by respondents to development at Callerton
Park on the grounds that it will:

Have an adverse impact on wildlife.

Result in loss of recreation amenity.

Have a significant impact on the existing road network and increase
congestion significantly, whilst putting existing services, infrastructure and
facilities under pressure.
 Increase
pollution.

Iave a detrimental impact on village/local character and identity.

Increase risk in the Ouseburn Catchment Area.

Narrow the greenbelt to within 1 kilometre of both Darras Hall and Heddon
on the Wall.

Increase traffic and congestion on the A69, B6918 and A1.
It was also noted that Lower Callerton is adjacent to a former coal extraction
site and therefore could have coal extraction in the future.
29
May 2012
In the Draft SLR the site was assessed as part of a wider area, including land to
the north of Stamfordham Road: ‘Callerton Park’. This was estimated to have a
capacity of in the order of 6,500 homes – well in excess of what could be
realistically built-out over the period to 2030 and indeed significantly greater
than the residual requirement after taking account of additional capacity
identified in the revised SHLAA. On this basis, it is appropriate to assess
component sites within Callerton Park separately.
The most obvious opportunity is site ref. 4813. This land is both visually and
physically separate from the land to the north of Stamfordham Road and is
identified as ‘Lower Callerton’ in the landowner’s submission to the draft Core
Strategy. This proposes a more extensive area for development (extending
further westwards). The table below assesses the development cell identified in
the landowner’s submission. If assessed in isolation this site scores just 17 out
of a possible 25 (as shown in the table below). Release for housing would
result in significant harm to Green Belt purposes by virtue of the degree of
urban sprawl and countryside encroachment. It is also important to note that
this area could accommodate in the region of 220 homes – somewhat in excess
of what could be realistically delivered in the Plan period (to 2030), given likely
constraints over the timing of development.
By comparison, a more limited development area, such as the southern part of
site 4813 (as defined in the Consultation Draft version of the Strategic Land
Review, September 2011) would score 19 out of a possible 25.
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Would reduce strategic gap between Newcastle and
Ponteland to 2.5km (and not 1km); would bring main built
up area closer to Throckley but gap of approx. 500m
could still be achieved. No part of the site is within 3km
of Heddon-on-the-Wall (not in any case a ‘protected’
gap). [NB: Revised area would not reduce gap with
Ponteland]
4/5
Countryside
encroachment
1.17km of 4.13km perimeter of site touching area outside
of Green Belt = 28%.
[Revised area = 40%]
2/5
Urban regeneration
5/5
Historic towns
5/5
Urban sprawl
of Green Belt = 28%
[Revised area = 40%]
1/5
30
[3 / 5]
[2 / 5]
May 2012
Gas Pipeline
The City’s main High Pressure Gas Pipeline runs through site 4813 in a northsouth direction, as well as sites 4814 (Dinnington), 4672 (Walbottle), 4936
(Hazlerigg) and 5037 (Newburn). The section of pipeline that runs thorough site
4813 is the River Tyne South / Tanfield Prestwick-Hazlerigg pipeline – HSE
reference no. 7876). In contrast to the section that affects the Dinnington site
(which effectively has a 60m ‘standoff’), and the constraints plan previously
provided by the landowners (which showed a 46m standoff either side of the
pipeline) it has now been established that the Health and Safety Executive only
advises against building residential properties within 3 metres of this particular
section of pipeline. This represents only a minor constraint to development of
the site and could be easily accommodated within the housing layout.
In the Strategic Land Review and Green Belt Assessment (September 2011) it
was considered that, if the pipeline was to result in an undevelopable strip of
more than 90 metres in width then this would represent a logical limit to
development and the western boundary of site 4813 was drawn accordingly.
However, the same cannot be said for a pipeline requiring a strip of just 6
metres to remain undeveloped. Consequently, land immediately to the southwest of site 4813 (part of site 5055 but in same ownership and landscape
character area) has now been considered within this development cell.
Minerals
Land to the west of site 4813 contains valuable mineral (coal) deposits which it
is currently viable to exploit. National and local planning policies seek to avoid
such deposits being effectively sterilised through development, either through
‘primary sterilisation’ (development on the land containing the deposits) or
through ‘secondary sterilisation’ (such as noise sensitive development of
adjacent land which would prevent or limit opencasting). There is a strong
presumption that development should not occur until such time as viable
mineral deposits have been extracted. Notwithstanding this, the Coal Authority
has raised no observations in respect of housing development of this site.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
The majority of homes if built on the southern part of Lower Callerton would be
located within a 15-20 minutes walk of Walbottle Village Primary School and St
Cuthbert’s RC Primary. The majority of homes if built would also be within a 20
minutes walk of both Knop Law and Milecastle primary schools but existing
walking routes could benefit from improvement.
The majority of homes if built on land to the north of Fell House Farm would be
in excess of 20 minutes walk of the closest primary schools.
31
May 2012
Secondary schools
The majority of homes if built on the southern part of Lower Callerton would be
within a 20-25 minutes walk of Walbottle Campus and a 30-35 minutes walk of
All Saints College. Public transport travel time from the edge of the site to the
nearest secondary school is approximately 6 minutes. The majority of homes if
built on land to the north of Fell House Farm would be in excess of 40 minutes
walk of the closest secondary schools. Schools in Ponteland are located some
5 to 7 kilometres from the sites.
Primary schools
The development of 1,850 dwellings could generate around an additional 320430 primary school pupils to be accommodated in the local schools. As at
October 2011, there is some limited capacity available at Knop Law Primary
and Walbottle Village Primary. Milecastle has more surplus places however this
capacity will reduce in the short term with the removal of temporary classrooms.
Meanwhile, St Cuthbert’s RC Primary School currently has no surplus places.
The existing available primary school capacity would serve pupils generated by
early stages of the development site. It may be physically possible to extend
Milecastle and/or Knop Law Primary Schools to create capacity for an additional
420 places but the lack of close proximity of existing schools to the Lower
Callerton sites is such that provision on-site is likely to be preferable. This
would take the form of a new singe-form entry school towards the end of the
Plan period, capable of being extended to two-form entry beyond 2030.
Secondary Schools
Development of Lower Callerton (1,850 dwellings) could generate up to 400
secondary school pupils and around 200 pupils looking to be admitted to
schools within the outer west area (52% pupils living in the outer west attend
schools in the outer west).
There is significant capacity available at Walbottle Campus and All Saints
College (West Denton) and this is forecast to rise without additional local
development to boost its pupil roll.
Currently, just over half (52%) of pupils living in the Outer West attend schools
in the Outer West, with many attending schools outside of the City. However,
Ponteland Middle School and Ponteland High school are both thought to have
less than 3% surplus places and so, without new provision there, schools in the
Outer West can be expected to accommodate much of the forecast growth in
demand (either directly or indirectly).
To conclude, access to existing primary schools is restricted across the site and
a new primary school could be needed to serve this site towards the end of the
plan period. There is sufficient local secondary school capacity.
32
May 2012
Site 4813 is approximately 1.5km (20 minutes) walk of a Sainsbury’s Local
supermarket at Chapel House Road (via Queensbury Drive, Chadderton Drive
& Chapel House Drive).
From a stop on the northern boundary of site 4813 bus service no.4 [Arriva]
provides a limited (9.40 until 3.40) hourly service to Metrocentre (46 minutes)
via West Denton District Centre (8 minutes).
The following table provide an overview of the accessibility of the site to existing
services and facilities and highlights where there is a need for additional
demand to enhance their viability. The scoring should be treated with caution
as, by their very nature, the majority of homes on larger sites are likely to be
more distant from facilities and services than smaller sites but are more able to
generate the critical mass and funding needed to support new and improved
facilities and services, which will greatly enhance accessibility.
In this particular instance, over time, the development of the Lower Callerton
sites would generate sufficient demand to support new education provision,
local centres and public transport services within a ‘Lifetime Neighbourhood’.
The relatively low scores currently attributed to the site will not be reflective of
the likelihood that the development of the site will improve accessibility through
generation of the critical mass of demand and funding required for new services
and facilities.
Lower Callerton: Site 4813
Total score: 12.5
Walking
Cycle
(Walbottle) (score 0-5 points)
17
XX
(Walbottle) (or High School) (score 0-5 points)
22
7
(Chapel House) or supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to
19
XX
facilities
No X
70 (M)
24 (E)
9 (L)
XX
D4 - Travel time to nearest 5,000 jobs (score 0-10); or
time to nearest 1,000 jobs (score 0-6)
>25 /
>25
14 /
9
120
(10km)
35 30
33
Public
transport
Score
2
17 4
0
X
0
2
22 /
16
2
0
2.5
May 2012
E. Deliverability
Availability
The landowners of the majority of the site are understood to be strongly
supportive of housing development at the earliest opportunity. The northeastern part of the site (reclaimed following opencasting in 1960s) is owned by
Newcastle City Council and is not currently being actively promoted for
development.
Housing mix
The site are well-placed to make a major contribution to meeting any need for
family houses, including larger detached houses within the context of building a
Lifetime Neighbourhood with a wide mix of housing options. A suitable mix
could include 40-50% larger, upper market and upper mid-market homes
(typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed homes), 20-30% mid-market homes (typically
smaller and medium–sized 3-bed homes) and 20-30% higher density, lower
cost market and affordable homes (including 2-bed bungalows).
Viability
Timescales
Assuming that, prior to planning permission being granted, the site is first
begin in 2017 (or thereabouts). However, it is not considered likely that the
developers of the Callerton Park sites would look to commence building all
three development areas at exactly the same time but rather over a period of
perhaps a couple of years. It is likely that Lower Callerton would be the last of
the three development areas to commence, perhaps in 2019. Assuming a
minimum of 2 developers then an average build rate of around 75 per annum
could be achieved. Consequently, on this basis the development of the
southern part of the site would extend until 2030, or beyond. It is logical to
commence with development of the southern part of site 4813, as this is more
distant from the Middle Callerton sites and should be perceived as a genuinely
separate outlet. This is in contrast to the northern part, which is likely to
compete more directly with Middle Callerton for purchasers, with the effect of
slowing the overall build rate.
34
May 2012
Altogether site 4813 has the physical capacity to accommodate up to 2,200
homes. A realistic estimate is that around 800 of these could be developed
within the Plan period (up to 2030), with development commencing to the south
of the area.
Consideration should be given to allocating the southern part of site 4813 for
housing development by 2030. Meanwhile, the northern part of site 4813 could
be considered for identification as ’safeguarded land’. This could be allocated
for development in a future review of the Development Plan if supported by firm
evidence of a lack of more suitable alternative sites to meet the identified
requirement for new homes.
35
May 2012
3. NEWBIGGIN HALL
Site refs:
4828, 4948 & 4950
Address:
Land to south of Newbiggin Lane and north of
Meadow Rise
Ownership:
William Leech / O’Neil
Site area (gross):
22 ha. (gross) / 14 ha. (net)
Estimated capacity: 400
Four submissions have been received in respect of the proposed
Neighbourhood Growth Area of Newbiggin Hall; these raise the following
issues:

The sites are adjacent to former coal workings.

Development would result in a loss of open space.

Development would have a detrimental impact on wildlife and habitats.

Access to the site is restrictive.

Development of Newbiggin Hall could result in further urban sprawl.

Development in the Green Belt will have a detrimental impact on
regeneration areas.

Increased traffic and congestion around Newbiggin Hall.
In combination these sites score 24 out of a possible 25, indicating that the sites
make only a modest contribution to Green Belt purposes. These sites are very
well contained by existing built form and cannot be thought of as urban sprawl.
36
May 2012
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
No increased tendency towards Newcastle merging with
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington.
of Green Belt = 86%
of Green Belt = 86%
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
Urban regeneration
Historic towns
Urban sprawl
5/5
5/5
5/5
4/5
Environmental factors
Site 4950 was initially identified as discounted in the Strategic Land Review and
Green Belt Assessment (Sept. 2011) on the grounds of potential noise impact
(from the adjoining A696) and because they form part of a ‘Green Wedge’.
However, following receipt of submissions in support of development on behalf
of the respective landowners it is accepted that these issues may not entirely
preclude development. Site 4950 would appear to have greatest potential for
Traffic & Access
Sites 4948 and 4950 both have road frontage with Newbiggin Lane which
should be capable of providing for acceptable site access to serve around 100
homes. There is currently a limited access for the largest of the sites, 4828,
from the A696 westbound. However it would not be appropriate to serve a
major housing development and instead an alternative point of access is
required. The preferred access is from the Meadow Rise estate to the south –
via Oulton Close (off Etal Way). Here a potential access has been reserved as
a ‘ransom strip’ and is understood to be owned by Newcastle City Council.
37
May 2012
D. Accessibility
Primary schools
The majority of homes if built on site 4828 would be within a 15 minutes walk of
the closest primary school – Cheviot Primary – and a 20 minutes walk of
Simonside, Farne and St Marks RC primary schools. The majority of homes if
built on sites 4948 and 4950 would be within a 10 minutes walk of Simonside
Primary School.
Secondary schools
The majority of homes if built on sites 4948 and 4950 would be within a 30
minutes walk of All Saints College (West Denton). The majority on site 4828
would be within a 35 minutes walk of All Saints but within 25 minutes walk of
Kenton College.
Primary schools
The development of 445 dwellings could generate around an additional 100
primary pupils or around 85 looking for admission to a local school in the outer
west area. With the additional development potential for a further 145 new
homes in local urban sites, there is a total of 115 pupils to be accommodated
within local schools.
There is some capacity available at Cheviot Primary School which is anticipated
to grow without additional local development to potentially boost it’s pupil roll.
There is greater spare capacity at Simonside Primary School. If sites at
Callerton were to generate significant numbers of pupils attending Simonside,
Cheviot is still likely to have additional capacity to accommodate the pupils
generated at Newbiggin Hall sites. As some 30% of existing pupils travel in
from outside Wooslington ward, more proximate development would generally
reduce the travel to school area over time given the proximity to school
admission criteria. However, there is also potential to extend Cheviot school,
depending on the timing of development and occupation of the new homes
compared with estimated supply.
Secondary schools
All Saints College currently has surplus capacity which is forecast to rise without
additional local development to boost its pupil roll. This is sufficient to
accommodate the additional demand generated by the development of new
homes at Newbiggin Hall.
To conclude, there is likely to be sufficient local capacity in primary and
secondary schools, albeit consideration may need to be given to extending
Cheviot Primary School to secure this.
38
May 2012
Sites 4828 and 4950 are within a 5 minute walk of convenience retail stores at
Newbiggin Hall, and Site 4948 within 10 minutes walking distance. The centre
comprises of a butcher, bakery and greengrocers.
Walking
Newbiggin Hall: Site 4828
Total score: 27
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary schools
(Cheviot/Simonside) (score 0-5 points)
13/20
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary schools
(Kenton/All Saints) (score 0-5 points)*
25/35
(Newbiggin Hall) or supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to
facilities
frequent service / Express bus stop (score 0-5 points) or to
local bus service stop (score 0-3 points)
D6 - Would housing development enhance viability of local
facilities and services?
39
Cycle
Public
transport
XX
8/10
Score
3
27 4
XX
4
library, doctors’ surgery
2
XX
3
9
12(M)
18(E)
18(L)
>25
11/
9
25/
20
85
(7km)
>25
31 0
Saints College, Newbiggin Hall
Centre & Metro
1
10
May 2012
Walking
Total score: 36
Cycle
Public
transport
Score
8
XX
Saints) (or High School) (score 0-5 points)
30
9
5
XX
5
2
XX
4
facilities
D6 – Would housing development enhance viability of
10 (M)
21 (E)
5 (L)
17 4
>20
12/
7
15/
8
6
95
(8km)
30
25
1
Centre & Metro
Walking
Total score: 31
4
Cycle
Public
transport
10
Score
11
XX
33
10
8
XX
4
2
4
facilities
9 (M)
19 (E)
9 (L)
XX
>20 /
18
9/
6
100
(8km)
30 28
40
3
23 4
18 /
14
Centre & Metro
4
0
10
May 2012
E. Deliverability
Availability
The landowners of all of the sites are understood to be strongly supportive of
housing development at the earliest opportunity.
Housing mix
The sites are not of sufficient size to create new neighbourhoods but rather
development would complement existing provision in Newbiggin Hall. The sites
are well-related but less central to Newbiggin Hall Shopping Centre and to other
services and facilities than elsewhere within Newbiggin Hall. Consequently, in
accordance with a density gradient approach, the sites are perhaps most suited
to being almost exclusively developed for medium and lower density family
homes. As such, they are well-placed to make a major contribution to meeting
any unmet need for family houses. A suitable mix could include a broadly even
mix of larger, upper mid-market homes (typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed
homes), and mid-market homes (typically smaller and medium–sized 3-bed
homes). Development of the sites could incorporate a modest element of
higher density, lower cost market and affordable homes, albeit consideration
could be given to provision of part of the requirement for 15% affordable homes
off-site (potentially as part of the redevelopment of Newbiggin Hall Shopping
Centre).
Viability
The sites lie in a mid value area where new homes can be expected to sell (at
current prices) for around £167 per square foot – i.e. approximately £130k to
£160k for a 3-bed house and £175k+ for a larger property. Indeed, values can
be expected to be similar to the adjacent ‘Meadow Rise’ estate. Based on the
sites would be viable but not to the extent that development can viability can
withstand making a sizeable financial contribution to the major infrastructure
required to support major housing development in the wider area. Notably,
major new infrastructure is not specifically required to allow for the development
of the Newbiggin Hall sites in isolation.
Timescales
Development Plan and allowing for typical lead-in times, construction on each of
the sites could begin in 2017 (or thereabouts). An average build rate of around
35 per annum could be achieved on each of the smaller sites, whilst site 4828
could achieve a slightly higher build rate but probably not as high as 50 per
annum, taking account of local market demand. If released for housing then
each of the sites can be expected to be fully developed by the end of the Plan
period.
41
May 2012
Altogether these sites have the physical capacity to accommodate up to 400
homes in a location which already commands high levels of accessibility
(certainly relative to other SLR sites under consideration) and without causing
unacceptable harm to Green Belt purposes or other interests. Importantly,
housing development would generate demand to help support the viability of
existing services and facilities.
Consideration should be given to allocating sites 4828, 4948 & 4950 for housing
development by 2030.
42
May 2012
4. LEMINGTON
Site refs.
4816
& 4946
Address:
Land west of Lemington Rise, Hexham Road
Ownership:
Northumberland Estates / Newcastle City Council
Site area (gross):
Estimated capacity:
500
The proposed Neighbourhood Growth Area of Lemington includes sites 4816 &
4946. Through the consultation process 10 submissions raised the following
issues:
 Development of the sites 4816/4946 will have a detrimental impact on
wildlife and habitats in Lemington.

Development will result in urban sprawl which will change the identity of
Lemington.

Growth would have an adverse impact on wildlife.

There will be a Loss of countryside.

There will be a Loss of open space and recreational amenity.

Brownfield development should be prioritised over greenbelt development.

Restrictive access to the sites via Aldeburgh Avenue.
In combination these sites scored 24 out of a possible 25, indicating that the
sites make only a modest contribution to Green Belt purposes.
43
May 2012
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington.
of Green Belt = 86%
of Green Belt = 86%
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
Urban regeneration
Historic towns
Urban sprawl
5/5
5/5
5/5
4/5
Scheduled Ancient Monument
Development of the northern site (4816) is very heavily constrained by
archaeology, with development prohibited on the line of the Vallum and
adjacent development likely to detrimentally affect the setting of the Vallum to
an unacceptable degree.
Access
No access would be permitted crossing the Vallum, which effectively prevents
an access from being achieved from the north. The southern site (4946) is less
constrained by archaeology but without being able to achieve an access from
the northern site, vehicle access is problematic.
The southern boundary of the site adjoins Hospital Lane, a single track road
with a significant level change to the site. It has not been shown that a suitable
access can be achieved for either site. Added to this difficulty, the accessibility
of the sites to key services and facilities and the scope for enhancement are
both somewhat limited
D. Accessibility
Primary schools
The majority of homes if built on the sites would be 15-20 minutes walk of
schools in Walbottle and 20-25 minutes walk from Lemington Riverside, Knop
Law and Milecastle primary schools
Secondary schools
The majority of homes if built would be 20-25 minutes walk of Walbottle
Campus.
44
May 2012
Capacity of Local Schools
Primary schools
There is some capacity available at Walbottle Village Primary School and this is
forecast to rise, without additional local development to boost its pupil roll.
Meanwhile, Lemington Riverside Primary has surplus capacity but this is
forecast to reduce. However, spare capacity is insufficient to accommodate
primary school additional pupils generated by 500 new homes (around 117
pupils per year), particularly when taking into account identified potential an
additional 650 new homes at Newburn Riverside. Overall, there is a lack of
proximate spare primary school capacity to meet the demand arising from the
development of as many as 500 new homes at Lemington but the sites lack the
critical mass to justify provision of a new school.
Secondary schools
The development of 500 homes could give rise to around 110 secondary school
age pupils. There is significant capacity available at Walbottle Campus and this
is projected to rise without additional local development to boost its pupil roll.
All Saints College also has surplus capacity that is forecast to rise without
additional local development to boost its pupil roll. There is sufficient capacity
to accommodate demand for secondary school places from all of the sites south
of the A69.
Site 4816 and 4946 are within a 10-15 minute walking distance of the Chapel
House Local centre, and a Sainsbury’s Local store, however, access to the site
for pedestrians will be constrained as it’s across the A69.
45
May 2012
Lemington: Site 4816
Total score: 12
Walking
Cycle
(Walbottle) (score 0-5 points)
19
XX
(Walbottle) (score 0-5 points)*
23
7
D2 (a) - Walking time to defined district/local centre or
supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to convenience store
(Sainsbury’s Local, Chapel Park) (score 0-3 points)
13
XX
1
facilities
No 0
frequent service / Express bus stop (score 0-5 points) or
to local bus service stop (score 0-3 points)
60 (M)
19 (E)
11 (L)
XX
1
>25 /
19
16 /
12
100
(8km)
30 26
No 0
Lemington: Site 4946
Total score: 15
Walking
Cycle
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary schools
(Walbottle/Lemington) (score 0-5 points)
20 / 25
XX
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary school (or High
School) (score 0-5 points)*
25
7
(Lemington) or supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to
20
XX
0
facilities
No 0
to local bus service stop (score 0-3 points)
65 (M)
17 (E)
5 (L)
XX
3
>25 /
14
11 /
6
105
(8km)
30 26
D6 – Would housing development enhance viability of
No
46
Public
transport
Score
2
15 4
18 /
14
4
0
Public
transport
Score
2
17 4
18 /
8
6
0
May 2012
E. Deliverability
Availability
The landowner of site 4816 is supportive of housing development. Site 4946 is
owned by Newcastle City Council and is not currently being actively promoted
for development.
Housing mix
The sites are not considered to be of sufficient size to provide for the viable
development of a new neighbourhood around a core of new key services. They
are also somewhat distant from services in established neighbourhoods. As
such, in accordance with a density gradient approach, the sites are perhaps
most suited to being almost exclusively developed for lower density family
homes. A suitable mix could include a broadly even mix of larger, upper midmarket homes (typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed homes), and mid-market
homes (typically smaller and medium–sized 3-bed homes). Development of the
sites could also incorporate a modest element of higher density, lower cost
market and affordable homes, albeit consideration could be given to provision of
part of the requirement for 15% affordable homes off-site).
Viability
£160k for a 3-bed house and £175k+ for a larger property. Indeed, values can
be expected to be similar to the adjacent ‘Lemington Rise’ estate. Based on the
sites would be viable but not to the extent that development can viability can
withstand making a sizeable financial contribution to the major infrastructure
required to support major housing development in the wider area.
Timescales
the sites could begin in 2017 (or thereabouts).
Assuming a single developer, an average build rate of around 50 per annum
could be achieved. If released for housing then each of the sites can be
expected to be fully developed by the end of the Plan period.
Development of the northern site (4816) is very heavily constrained by
archaeology.
The southern site (4946) is less constrained by archaeology but without being
able to achieve an access from the northern site, vehicle access is problematic.
47
May 2012
The accessibility of the sites to key services and facilities and the scope for
enhancement are both somewhat limited.
Given the constraints imposed by archaeology, the lack of evidence of a
suitable site access and a reasonably low level of accessibility it is
recommended that sites 4816 and 4948 should not be allocated for housing
development but rather should remain in the statutory Tyne & Wear Green Belt.
48
May 2012
5. KINGSTON PARK & KENTON BANK FOOT
Site refs.
4951,
4661, 4662, 4663, 4819, 4820, 4827, 4930, 4949,
4961 & 5047
Address:
Land to the north of Brunton Road, Kingston Park;
Ponteland Road & Station Road, Kenton Bank Foot
Ownership:
Rutherford / Brown / UNN / Arthur / St Mary the
Virgin
Site area:
Estimated capacity:
850
The proposed Neighbourhood Growth Area of Kingston Park/Kenton Bank Foot
was the subject of 127 submissions. These raised the following issues:

Site is adjacent to a former area of coal extraction.

Development will increase traffic and congestion on Brunton Road.

Development of the area will change the character and result in a loss of
local identity.

Site groups have no coherence or urban form.

new development will have an impact on existing infrastructure, services and
facilities.

Congestion on a local network already at capacity, particularly at Kingston
Park retail centre.

Development will have an adverse impact on wildlife and habitats.

Development will result in a loss of recreational amenity, particularly access
to open space.

There will be a loss of countryside and agricultural land.
49
May 2012
In combination sites to the north-west of Kingston Park / Kenton Bank Foot
scored 19 out of a possible 25, indicating some harm to Green Belt purposes
but it is considered that this could be outweighed by any overriding need for
homes.
Consideration
Coalescence
Countryside
encroachment
Urban regeneration
Historic towns
Urban sprawl
Comment
Slightly increased tendency towards Newcastle merging
with Airport (and more so Newcastle with Woolsington)
of Green Belt = 46%
of Green Belt = 46%
Score
4/5
3/5
5/5
5/5
2/5
Site 4827 has been added to this suite of sites following the consultation on the
2011 SLR Report. It scored 24 out of 25, indicating only a modest contribution
to Green Belt purposes.
The site is considered to be physically suitable for housing.
The site is not designated either locally or nationally for its nature conservation
interest.
Some loss of agricultural land is inevitable if the requirement for housing is to be
delivered, either in the City or in adjacent authorities. However, neither the loss
of these sites, nor any others within the SLR assessment, would result in the
loss of Grade 1 or Grade 2 agricultural land, which the planning system has
previously sought to protect but which the NPPF now makes no reference to.
Site 4827 was not previously identified as a potential housing site, essentially
because of its limited size, configuration and the proximity to major highways
(noise impact). The site broadens towards the intersection of A1 and A696
(eastern part of site) and could have some limited potential for development.
The site is arguably more suitable for commercial use than residential, reflecting
land uses on the northern side of the heavily trafficked Ponteland Road (which
forms the northern boundary of the site). There is no overriding need to remove
land from the Green Belt for this purpose, if site 4828 (Newbiggin Hall) was to
be removed from the Green Belt (for housing purposes), alongside other
deletions at Kenton Bank Foot and Callerton then, as a consequence, this site
will be effectively divorced from the wider Green Belt and, as such, would also
need to be deleted.
50
May 2012
Traffic & Access:
With the exception of site 5047, which would need to be accessed either
through site 4819 or the Falcon’s ground, the sites all have main road frontage
capable of accommodating new points of access.
Site 4827 can potentially be accessed from the existing roundabout at the
junction of Ponteland Road and Brunton Lane.
A Transport Assessment will be required to demonstrate whether and how the
demand generated from residential development can be satisfactorily
accommodated on both the local and strategic highway network.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
The closest primary school to the sites is Kingston Park Primary (2 form entry).
For sites to the south of the Metro line Simonside Community Primary School
and Cheviot Primary School are also equidistant.
Kingston Park Primary School is located approximately 300-500m (5 minutes)
walk from site 4819; 400-800m (5-10 minutes) walk from sites 5047 and 4661;
600-1000m (10-15 minutes) walk from sites 4820, 4951 & 4662; 1000-1200m
(15-20 minutes) walk from sites 4661 & 4930 and 1200-1500m (20 minutes
walk) from sites 4663 & 4949.
Secondary Schools
Kenton School is the nearest secondary school and is located 2.2 to 2.8 km (3035 mins walk) from the site, with the A1 representing a major barrier to
pedestrian and cycle movements. Ponteland Middle and High Schools in
Northumberland are located further afield (approximately 7km).
Primary Schools
Currently there are a few surplus school places at Kingston Park Primary
School. Development of 850 homes would generate additional demand for
around 210 primary school places, around 160 within local schools. The school
currently draws 333 (83%) of its pupils from the local area (comprising of
Kingston Park, Kenton Bank Foot and Great Park) and a further 54 (13%) from
the adjacent North Central wards of Blakelaw, Fawdon & Kenton. Conversely,
a significant number of pupils living in Castle ward (which includes Kingston
Park but also Dinnington and Brunswick/Hazlerigg) already attend primary
schools outside the area – notably Gosforth and Ponteland.
It is evident that there is currently insufficient capacity in the local primary
school to accommodate the additional demand expected to result from new
51
May 2012
housing development at Kingston Park/Kenton Bank Foot. Indeed, the Kingston
Park area already experiences a net outflow of pupils. To expect an ever
greater number of future pupils in the Kingston Park area whether living in new
homes or existing homes to have to travel outside of the area for primary
education would be contrary to sustainability principles.
Additional primary school capacity could take the form of either an extension to
Kingston Park Primary School from a 2 form entry to a 3-form entry school with
an additional 210 places or a new one-form entry school. Alternatively, the
scope for extending Kingston Park to a 4 form entry could be explored, if
necessary. Extending schools is a more cost-effective option. The timing of
new provision would depend upon a number of factors, including the timing and
pace of new housing and the extent of the time lag between new homes being
built and demand being generated for new school places.
Secondary Schools
There is currently very little spare capacity at Kenton School. The nearest
alternative school with significant spare capacity is All Saints in West Denton.
This is located more than 3.0km (more than 40 mins walk) from the closest of
the sites. In Northumberland, Ponteland Middle School and Ponteland High
School are both thought to have less than 3% surplus places.
Kenton School currently draws around three-quarters of its pupils from its main
‘Travel To School Area’ of Kenton (22%), Blakelaw (17%), Fawdon (15%),
Woolsington (11%) and Castle (9%). However, the school does attract more
than 500 pupils from further afield (notably 205 from Fenham ward). Over the
course of time demand from new homes at Kingston Park could displace some
of the demand arising from more distant locations. This could help to indirectly
sustain demand for schools with high levels of spare capacity, such as All
Saints and Excelsior.
In conclusion, there is currently insufficient local primary and secondary school
capacity to fully support the development of these sites. In the medium term
(within around 10 years) additional primary school provision would need to be
made at Kingston Park. However, it should be possible to accommodate the
additional demand for secondary school places by utilising existing spare
capacity across a number of schools to the north and west of the City.
Sites 4819, 4820, 4951 & 5047 are within 800 metres (10 minutes) walk to
Kingston Park District Centre and the other sites are all within a 1.2km (15
minutes) walk. This centre contains a large Tesco store and other convenience
and comparison goods retailing.
Site 4930 is 300-400 metres (less than 5 minutes) walk of Kenton Bank Foot
Metro Station. The remaining sites are all within 400-800 metres (5 to 10
minutes) walk of either Kenton Bank Foot Metro Station (sites 4661, 4662,
52
May 2012
4663, 4819, 4949, 4961 & 5047) or Kingston Park Metro Station (sites 4820 &
4951).
Immediately to the south of sites 4820 & 4951 and well within 400 metres (5
minutes) walk, service no. X47 [Stagecoach] provides a 10-minute frequency
(13 minutes duration) express service to Newcastle City Centre.
Well within 400 metres (5 minutes) walk of sites 4661,4662 & 4961, services no.
X78 [Stagecoach] provide a 30-minute frequency (14 minutes duration) express
service to Newcastle City Centre; an additional bi-hourly service is provided by
service no. 74 [Go North East]. Service no. X78 is also within 400 metres (5
minutes) walk of sites 4663, 4930 & 4949.
The closest bus stops to sites 4819 and 5047 are also well within 400 metres (5
minutes) walk but service no. 74 [Go North East] provides only a limited
frequency (bi-hourly) service to Newcastle City Centre. These sites are within
800 metres (10 minute walk) of frequent services X47 and X78.
In addition to providing access to Newcastle City Centre, these and other
services provide convenient access to Kingston Park District Centre, Newcastle
Airport and Ponteland.
53
May 2012
Kenton Bank Foot: Site 4661
Total score: 24.5
Walking
Cycle
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary school (Kingston
Park) (score 0-5 points)
13
XX
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary school (Kenton
Academy) (score 0-5 points)*
31
9
(Kingston Park) or supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to
12
XX
3
facilities
No 0
9 (M)
21 (E)
5 (L)
XX
4
?/
19
9/
6
90
(7km)
27 19
Yes - Metro
Total score: 24.5
Walking
Cycle
13
XX
31
9
12
XX
3
facilities
No 0
9 (M)
21 (E)
5 (L)
XX
4
?/
19
9/
6
90
(7km)
27 19
Yes - Metro
54
Public
transport
Score
3
17 4
13 /
9
6
2
2.5
Public
transport
Score
3
17 4
13 /
9
6
2
2.5
May 2012
Total score: 19.5
Walking
Cycle
18
XX
34
10
15
XX
3
facilities
No 0
9 (M)
17 (E)
10 (L)
XX
4
?/
23
11 /
7
90
(7km)
27 26
Yes - Metro
Kingston Park: Site 4819
Total score: 28.5
Walking
Cycle
5
XX
29
9
10
XX
facilities
Yes – doctors’ surgery,
community centre
10 (M)
13 (E)
3 (L)
XX
?/
15
9/
4
90
(7km)
27 22
Yes - Metro
55
Public
transport
Score
2
20 4
17 /
12
4
0
2.5
Public
transport
Score
5
17 4
4
2
4
14 /
10
6
1
2.5
May 2012
Total score: 23.5
Walking
Cycle
9
XX
31
9
10
XX
facilities
community centre
10 (M)
4 (E)
4 (L)
XX
>20 /
>20
13 /
6
90
(7km)
27 27
Yes- Metro
Total score: 27.5
Walking
Cycle
14
XX
28
8
9
XX
facilities
community centre
5 (M)
12 (E)
6 (L)
XX
?/
19
9/
5
90
(7km)
27 24
Yes - Metro
56
Public
transport
Score
4
20 4
4
2
5
20 /
11
4
0
2.5
Public
transport
Score
3
15 4
4
2
5
13 /
8
6
1
2.5
May 2012
Total score: 22.5
Walking
Cycle
16
XX
32
9
13
XX
3
facilities
No 0
7 (M)
15 (E)
8 (L)
XX
4
?/
21
9/
6
90
(7km)
27 24
Yes – Metro
Total score: 28.5
Walking
Cycle
D1(a) – Walking time to nearest primary school (Kingston
10
XX
30
9
9
XX
D2 (b) – Majority of homes within 10 minutes walk of
facilities
community centre
9 (M)
27 (E)
4 (L)
XX
?/
19
11 /
6
13 /
8
90
(7km)
27
18 2
Yes - Metro
57
Public
transport
Score
2
18 4
14 /
9
6
1
2.5
Public
transport
Score
4
16 4
4
2
4
6
2.5
May 2012
Total score: 24.5
Walking
Cycle
15
XX
34
10
15
XX
3
facilities
No 0
9 (M)
27 (E)
4 (L)
XX
4
?/
19
11 /
6
90
(7km)
27 18
Yes – Metro
Total score: 22.5
Walking
Cycle
6
XX
31
9
12
XX
3
facilities
No 0
13 (M)
9 (E)
7 (L)
XX
4
?/
17
11 /
5
95
(7.5km)
28 25
Yes – Metro
58
Public
transport
Score
3
17 4
13 /
8
6
2
2.5
Public
transport
Score
4
21 4
18 /
15
4
1
2.5
May 2012
Total score: 23.5
Walking
Cycle
17
XX
17
5
10
XX
facilities
Yes – doctors’ surgery
12 (M)
8 (E)
8 (L)
XX
>20 /
10
11 /
5
75
23 20
Yes - Metro
Public
transport
2
17 5
4
1
3
18 /
7
E. Deliverability
Availability
The landowners of all of the sites are supportive of housing development and
Taylor Wimpey is understood to have secured options on the majority of the
sites - i.e. sites 4661, 4662, 4663, 4949 & 4961 (Rutherford) and 4819 & 4820
(Brown).
Housing mix
Although collectively the sites have a capacity for approximately 850 homes
(large enough to from a neighbourhood in their own right) they relate more to
the existing neighbourhoods of Kenton Bank Foot and Kingston Park than to
each other and are separated from each other by the Metro, Ponteland Road,
existing housing and the Falcons. For the most part the sites are well-related
to, but are not in very close proximity of, Kingston Park Shopping Centre, metro
stations and other local services and facilities. Consequently, in accordance
with a density gradient approach, the sites are perhaps most suited to being
almost exclusively developed for medium and lower density family homes. As
such, they are well-placed to make a major contribution to meeting any unmet
need for family houses. A suitable mix could include a broadly even mix of
larger, upper mid-market homes (typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed homes), and
mid-market homes (typically smaller and medium–sized 3-bed homes).
Development of the sites should incorporate a modest element of higher
59
Score
4
2
2.5
May 2012
density, lower cost market and affordable homes, ideally in the most highly
accessible locations.
Viability
Timescales
the sites could begin in 2017 (or thereabouts).
Assuming two outlets operating concurrently, each with a single developer, an
average build rate of around 80 per annum could be achieved. If released for
housing then each of the sites can be expected to be fully developed by the end
of the Plan period.
All of these sites, with the exception of site 4827, are capable of representing a
suitable, sustainable location for housing development and could contribute in
the order of 850 homes towards the City’s housing requirement, including a high
proportion of family houses.
Consideration should be given to allocating these sites, through the One Core
Strategy, for the development of around 850 homes in a Kingston Park / Kenton
Bank Foot ‘neighbourhood growth area’.
60
May 2012
6. NORTH GOSFORTH
Site refs.
4665 & 4706
Address:
Land south of Rotary Way & noth-west of A1 at
North Brunton
Ownership:
Ashdale Land & Property Co.
Site area (gross):
13.8 ha. (gross) / 4.0 ha. (net)
Estimated capacity:
100
Through the consultation process 6 submissions raised objection to site 4665
being brought forward for housing for the following reasons:

Development of site 4665 would have an impact on the road network.

Increased risk of flooding.
 Increased
pollution.

Adverse impact on wildlife.

Increased pressure on the surrounding local services and facilities.
Site 4706 was originally discounted on the basis that it would effectively function
as a further expansion of NGP and may not increase overall housing delivery
but rather could displace demand for housing elsewhere at NGP. This has
been challenged on behalf of the landowner and consequently, it is appropriate
to reconsider the potential of the site to contribute to the City’s future housing
land supply.
These sites each scored 19 out of a possible 25, indicating some harm to Green
Belt purposes but considered to be outweighed if there was an overriding need
for homes. The landowners agent has questioned the scoring of these sites in
relation to ‘countryside encroachment’ and ‘urban sprawl’ but this is not
accepted. The calculation relates to the perimeters of areas to be removed
from the Green Belt that would minimise the need for deletion whilst retaining
logical, defensible boundaries.
61
May 2012
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington (but development of
site 4665 would consolidate development to south of gap
between Newcastle and Wideopen & development of site
4706 would reduce gap with Wideopen to 300m).
4/5
Countryside
encroachment
535m of 975m perimeter of site 4665 touching area
outside of Green Belt = 55%; 675m of 1245m perimeter
of site 4706 touching area outside of Green Belt = 54%.
3/5
Urban regeneration
No demonstrable adverse impact on urban regeneration.
5/5
Historic towns
5/5
Urban sprawl
535m of 975m perimeter of site touching area outside of
Green Belt = 55%; 675m of 1245m perimeter of site 4706
touching area outside of Green Belt = 54%.
2/5
The sites are considered to be physically suitable for housing. They are not
designated either locally or nationally for its nature conservation interest. Nor
are they identified by the Environment Agency as at risk from flooding.
Development of the sites will be expected to contribute to local highway
improvements, where necessary.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
Both sites are located within a 10-15 minutes walk of Brunton First School.
Hazlewood Primary and Greenfields Primary in North Tyneside are both
approximately 30 minutes walk from site 4706.
Secondary Schools
Brunton First School is a feeder school for Gosforth Junior High Middle School
and Gosforth High School. Both are around 35 to 40 minutes walk and a 10
minutes public transport travel time from the sites. Seaton Burn College is
around 45 minutes walk from the sites.
62
May 2012
Primary Schools
An additional 65 family homes would generate a further 15 primary school age
pupils. Brunton First School (180 pupil places) currently has limited capacity. It
has been built to accommodate additional pupils from the approved Great Park
development. There has been a recent consultation on proposals to extend the
school from a 1 to 2 form entry. Currently 50% of pupils travel in from outside
Castle and Parklands wards, additional local pupils would constrain the extent
of the existing travel to school area for future pupils.
Hazlewood Primary School (269 pupil places) is thought to have capacity to
accommodate additional pupils.
Secondary Schools
An additional 65 family homes would generate a further 14 secondary school
pupils. There is currently limited capacity in the middle schools in Gosforth and
the Secondary School. Ponteland schools also have limited capacity but there
is, however, thought to be current capacity at Seaton Burn Secondary School.
The impact on school capacity of the development of site 4706 in isolation
would not be sizeable (at just 2 pupils per year group) and certainly not
sufficient to justify an extension or new school. However, the cumulative
impacts on secondary age provision of wider housing developments in the area
will need to be addressed by extensions to existing middle/high schools and/or
new provision.
The Sites are within a 15 minute walk to Brunton Park Local Centre and 5
minutes walk to the CO-OP at North Brunton services, however access to the
convenience store is constrained by need to cross heavily trafficked roads.
63
May 2012
North Gosforth: Site 4665
Total score: 25
Walking
D1(a) – Walking time to nearest primary school (Brunton
First) (score 0-5 points)
Public
transport
Score
15 X
X
3
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary school or High
School) (Gosforth High) (score 0-5 points)
35 10
5
5
D2 (a) – Walking time to defined district/local centre or
supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to convenience store (Coop
@ North Brunton Services) (score 0-3 points)
2X
X
3
D2 (b) – Majority of homes within 10 minutes walk of facilities
No
X
X
0
35 (M)
? (E)
2 (L)
XX
D4 - Travel time to nearest 5,000 jobs (score 0-10); or time
to nearest 1,000 jobs (score 0-6)
>20 /
>20
14 /
8
10 /
7
80
(6.5km)
25
14 3
No 0
North Gosforth: Site 4706
Total score: 14
Walking
Cycle
Public
transport
Score
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary school (Brunton First)
(score 0-5 points)
10-15 X
X
3
School) (score 0-5 points)
40 12
18
3
supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to convenience store (Coop
@ North Brunton Services) (score 0-3 points)
10 X
X
2
No
X
X
0
40 (M)
? (E)
15 (L)
XX
>25 /
>25
17 /
10
80
(6.5km)
25 25
No 0
64
Cycle
3
8
1
20 /
18
4
1
May 2012
E. Deliverability:
Availability
The landowner is strongly supportive of housing development at the earliest
opportunity and has submitted representations to the Council to this effect.
Housing mix
Site 4706 is well-placed to make a major contribution to meeting any unmet
need for family houses, including larger detached houses. The site adjoins the
north-eastern boundary of Newcastle Great Park and, although it may be
developed separately from Newcastle Great Park, it would effectively represent
a peripheral development cell.
A suitable mix could include 40-50% larger, upper market and upper mid-market
lower cost market and affordable homes.
Site 4665 is more constrained, being of limited size and with highways on three
sides. It would appear to be more suited to the development of apartments or
specialist housing products rather than family homes.
Viability
Timescales
removed from the Green Belt and allocated for housing through the Local Plan
and allowing for typical lead-in times, construction could begin in 2017 (or
thereabouts), with both sites built out within a couple of years
F. Conclusion & recommendation:
Site 4665 is capable of representing a suitable, sustainable location for housing
development, but is more suitable for the development of apartments than
family homes. Meanwhile, site 4706 is currently less accessible but this can be
expected to improve with the continued build out of Great Park generating a
critical mass to support local facilities and services.
Consideration should be given to identifying North Gosforth as a
‘neighbourhood growth area’ in the One Core Strategy, for the development of
around 100 homes, with the sites allocated through the forthcoming Local Plan.
65
May 2012
7. NEWCASTLE GREAT PARK (western expansion)
Site ref.
4959
extended
Address:
Land west of Brunton Lane
Ownership:
Fairburn / Arthur / NIAL
Site area:
Estimated capacity:
1,500
The proposed Neighbourhood Growth Area of Newcastle Great Park in an
extension to site 4959. Through the consultation process 12 submissions raised
the following issues:

Risk of flooding the Ouesburn Catchment Area.

Adverse impact on wildlife.

Brownfield sites should be prioritised.

Development at Great Park will result in further Urban Sprawl.
In the Draft SLR the site scored 22 out of a possible 25. However, this was on
the basis of an assessment in combination with site 5045 (City of Newcastle
United Golf Club), given that the development of the site would narrow the
connection between site 5045 (City of Newcastle United Golf Club) and the
wider Green Belt. Site 5045 itself makes only a modest contribution to Green
Belt purposes (scoring 24 out of 25) and would be protected as open space
irrespective of its inclusion in the Green Belt.
However, it is acknowledged that assessing site 4959 in combination with site
5045 heavily skews the calculation of ‘countryside encroachment’ and ‘urban
sprawl’ scores. This approach has been strongly criticised and, upon further
reflection, it is considered inappropriate to approach the assessment in this
manner (especially as the development of site 4959 would not ‘sever’ the Golf
Course from the wider Green Belt and thus not necessitate its removal).
66
May 2012
Scored in isolation site 4959 (as enlarged) scores 18 out of a possible 25, as
illustrated in the table below. Release for housing would result in significant
harm to Green Belt purposes by virtue of the degree of urban sprawl and
countryside encroachment.
However, the site represents the only logical opportunity for expansion of the
Great Park and could be required in the latter half of the Plan period to continue
the supply of new homes for the city (which would otherwise need to be made
up elsewhere).
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland or Cramlington; would reduce gap between
Kingston Park and airport (but not significantly more so
than NGP)
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
1.25km of 3.99km perimeter of site touching
area outside of Green Belt = 31%
2/5
Urban
regeneration
No demonstrable adverse impact on urban
regeneration
5/5
Historic towns
No impact on setting or special character of
Durham, Hexham, Corbridge or Morpeth
5/5
Urban sprawl
1.25km of 3.99km perimeter of site touching
area outside of Green Belt = 31%
1/5
The site is considered to be physically suitable for housing.
The site is not designated either locally or nationally for its nature conservation
interest.
It is not identified by the Environment Agency as at risk from flooding.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
67
May 2012
The majority of homes if built on the site would be around 20-30 minutes walk of
Brunton First School and 15 to 30 minutes walk of Kingston Park Primary
School.
Secondary Schools
Brunton First School is a feeder school for Gosforth Junior High Middle School
and Gosforth High School. These schools are a significant travel distance from
Great Park (approx. 50 minutes walk / 15 minutes cycle, crossing the A1).
Middle and High schools in Ponteland, Northumberland are a comparable travel
distance.
Primary Schools
1,300 new dwellings would generate around 260 primary age pupils. This in
isolation would justify development of a single-form entry primary school.
However, this must also be considered in the context of other development at
Newcastle Great Park, which benefits from permission for 2,500 homes, of
which around 1,350 remain to be built. An additional 500 homes or so could be
achieved through increased density and a further 1,200 homes by substitution
of housing for employment in development cells A and C. This could raise the
total capacity of the existing NGP development areas to around 4,200 homes,
with more than 3,000 remaining to be built. Such a scale of development is in
itself likely to give rise, over time, to a need for a further two-form entry primary
school.
Brunton First School (180 pupil places) currently has limited capacity. It was
built to accommodate additional pupils from the approved Great Park
development and there has been a recent consultation on proposals to extend
the school from a single-form to a two-form entry school, feeding into secondary
schools. Currently, 50% of pupils travel in from outside Castle and Parklands
wards and additional local pupils arising from the development of this site would
live in greater proximity to the school and therefore, over time, would reduce the
availability of places for pupils to travel in from further afield.
Overall, in addition to expansion of the existing Brunton School, continued
housing development at NGP will give rise to a need for significant additional
provision. This could take the form of a three-form entry school (which is likely
to be more cost-effective than separate provision). This could be developed
initially as a single-form entry school with a view to expansion in line with
demand. The eastern part of this site is well placed to accommodate such a
development, being centrally located within the area containing cells A and D
and the potential western expansion site itself.
68
May 2012
Secondary Schools
Development of an additional 1,300 new dwellings on this site could generate
around 280 secondary school pupils. Again, this is in addition to additional
pupils expected to be generated by the continued build-out of other parts of
Great Park (around 650 pupils) but also Kingston Park and Dinnington.
There is currently limited capacity in secondary schools in the Gosforth area
and the impact of wider housing developments between the A696 and A1 on
demand for secondary school age provision would need to be addressed by
new provision. In total, the cumulative demands from committed and potential
housing developments in the area would generate pupils of a scale requiring
provision of a new seven-form entry secondary school.
In conclusion, there is insufficient capacity in existing schools in the area to
accommodate the additional primary and secondary age children that would be
generated by the development of this site and other sites in the area. Provision
of new schools for both primary and secondary school age children will be
required at Great Park. This could be provided on a joint site as part of a
‘through’ school.
The site is more than 1.5km (20 minutes walk) to Kingston Park District Centre
and more than 1.2km (15 minutes walk) to the newly designated Great Park
District Centre (expected to be developed by 2017 and anchored by one of the
major foodstore operators).
69
May 2012
Walking
NGP Western Expansion: Site 5146
Total score: 5
Cycle
Public
transport
Score
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary schools (Brunton
First & Kingston Park) (score 0-5 points)
25 X
X
1
Academy) (score 0-5 points)
45 13
?
3
supermarket (Kingston Park) (score 0-5 points) or to
25 X
X
0
D2 (b) - Majority of homes within 10 minutes walk of facilities
No
X
0
X
25 (M)
? (E)
? (L)
>25 /
>25
15 /
13
No data
0
100
(8km)
30
No data
0
XX
1
No 0
E. Deliverability:
Availability
The landowners of the sites are all understood to be strongly supportive of
Housing mix
The site is well-placed to make a major contribution to meeting any unmet need
for family houses, including larger detached houses within the context of
Viability
70
May 2012
Importantly, the delivery of the proposed bypass and major housing growth west
of the A1 are co-dependent: significant housing growth to the west of the A1 is
unlikely to be supported by the Highways Agency without construction of a
bypass and funding for the bypass requires a critical mass of contributions from
development. It follows that high and sustained build rates at Great Park,
Callerton Park and Kingston Park/Kenton Bank Foot are likely to be needed if
any of these sites are to be developed to any significant degree.
Timescales
Assuming that, prior to planning permission being granted, the site are first
removed from the Green Belt and allocated for housing through the
Development Plan and allowing for typical lead-in times, construction could in
theory begin in 2017 (or thereabouts). However, the developers of Great Park
are of the view that the site will not be required until such time as some of the
existing other development cells or ‘outlets’ are largely exhausted. It is
projected that by 2022 all but Cells D and A will be built out and a further outlet
would be required at that time to sustain the build rate of around 200 per annum
(otherwise it could fall to around 150 per annum).
Assuming 2 developers and an average build rate of 60-70 per annum across
each outlet then site 4959 could yield around 500 homes by 2030.
The development of site 4959 would result in significant harm to the purposes of
the Green Belt and the site is not currently a particularly accessible location.
Notwithstanding this, the site would provide sufficient critical mass to new and
improved facilities and services. In particular, it would represent perhaps the
most appropriate location for the new primary and secondary school provision
required to serve the continued build out of sites in the area. Furthermore, the
suitability of the site should be seen in the wider context: without a critical mass
of development then essential infrastructure needed to support any significant
development is unlikely to be capable of being adequately funded. Therefore,
sites at Lower, Middle and Upper Callerton, Great Park and Kingston Park /
Kenton Bank Foot need to be considered as inter-dependent: almost effectively
a single site. On this basis it is considered that the harm that would be caused
to the Green Belt and other interests is outweighed by the essential contribution
of the site to meeting any the identified housing requirement.
Consideration should be given to allocating, through the One Core strategy, part
of site 5146 for the development of around 500 homes and new education
provision by 2030 and identifying the remainder as ’safeguarded land’. This
could be allocated for development in a future review of the Development Plan if
supported by firm evidence of a lack of more suitable alternative sites to meet
the identified requirement for new homes.
71
May 2012
8. SALTERS LANE
Site refs.
4667
& 4926
Address:
Land at Scotts House Farm, Salters Lane
Ownership:
Persimmon / Newcastle City Council
Site area:
Estimated capacity:
Up to 600 homes
The proposed Neighbourhood Growth Area of ‘Salters Lane’ includes sites 4667
& 4926. Through the consultation process 2925 submissions and 2 petitions
with 124 signatures raised the following issues in objection to housing
development:

The sites are opposite the Gosforth Nature Reserve which is a SSSI.

Impact development could have a detrimental impact on the wildlife corridor.
Loss of countryside and environmental impacts.

Development will result in urban sprawl.

Increased flood risk.

Loss of recreational amenity.

Loss of agricultural land.

Loss of views.

Increased traffic and congestion, particularly at Haddricks Mill.

Increased CO2 emissions.

Poor access to the site.

De-value house prices.

Loss of cycleways.

The development of the site would reach within 1 km of Whitebridge Park.

Increase pollution.

Increase pressure on local services and facilities.

Respondent’s comments suggested they are against the spatial strategy
opposing any development in the greenbelt.
72
May 2012
In the Draft SLR the site scored 22 out of a possible 25. However, this was on
the basis of an assessment in combination with site 5044 (Gosforth Golf Club),
given that the development of the site would narrow the connection between
site 5044 and the wider Green Belt. Site 5044 itself makes only a modest
contribution to Green Belt purposes (scoring 22 out of 25) and would be
protected as open space irrespective of its inclusion in the Green Belt.
However, it is acknowledged that assessing site 4667 in combination with site
5044 heavily skews the calculation of ‘countryside encroachment’ and ‘urban
sprawl’ scores. This approach has been strongly criticised and, upon further
reflection, it is considered inappropriate to approach the assessment in this
manner (especially as the development of site 4667 would not ‘sever’ the Golf
Course from the wider Green Belt, but would instead retain a connection more
than 400 metres in width, and thus would not necessitate removal of the Golf
Course from the Green Belt).
Scored in isolation site 4667 scores 18 out of a possible 25, as illustrated in the
table below. Release of the entire site for housing would result in significant
harm to Green Belt purposes by virtue of the degree of urban sprawl and
countryside encroachment. It is, however, important to note that not all of the
site would be developed and it is reasonable to assume that the undeveloped
areas would not be removed from the Green Belt. In this respect the landowner
has submitted an ‘Ecological Desk Study’ that includes a ‘draft ecological
masterplan’ and which shows the western and northern parts of the site as
remaining undeveloped. If the housing development area was to be further
scaled back to one with a perimeter of 1.6km, with 0.65km (>40%) adjoining
land outside of the Green Belt then the site would instead score 20. This could
enclose an area of around 12 hectares with capacity for around 300 homes.
Consideration
Coalescence
Countryside
encroachment
Urban regeneration
Historic towns
Urban sprawl
Comment
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington (Longbenton is not a
separate settlement)
of Green Belt = 29%
of Green Belt = 29%
Score
5/5
2/5
5/5
5/5
1/5
Note, 550m of 990m perimeter of site 4926 touches an area outside of the
Green Belt = 56%. The site scored 20 out of a possible 25.
73
May 2012
Ecology
The landowner has submitted an Ecological Study and has suggested
significant biodiversity enhancements in an attempt to address wildlife
concerns. However, it is considered that a sizeable residential development in
close proximity to Gosforth Park Nature Reserve and SSSI would result in harm
which cannot easily be mitigated by biodiversity enhancements. In the view of
the Council’s Ecologist no amount of careful landscaping can fully restrict
access of people and pets into the Reserve. Indeed if it was to successfully
prevent unwanted access it would also prevent native wildlife from moving in
and out of the site.
There would be further pressure on the red squirrel population from grey
squirrels and domestic pets. Badger, red squirrels and roe deer are reported to
use the woodland plantations along the boundary of the site. The value of
these habitats would be greatly diminished with this development. In addition
the report states that arable habitats are very common in the wider countryside
but scarcer in urban areas. This particular site is on the edge of the urban
fringe and as such is becoming a threatened and rapidly declining habitat. At
present it provides a buffer zone between the urban areas and Gosforth Park
and provides additional foraging sites. Development of this area would just
isolate this site further and could reduce the effectiveness of the wildlife
corridor.
It is also impossible to say at this time what mitigation would be suitable for this
sensitive site. No ecological surveys have yet been carried out and an entire
season’s surveys would need to be carried out before mitigation could be
discussed in detail.
It is important to note that at the time of initial consultation on the Draft Strategic
Land Review the residual requirement from Green Belt sites was estimated to
number approximately 7,500 homes. This required consideration be given to
making difficult choices in respect of more sensitive locations in order to
achieve the requisite large number and wide distribution of ‘outlets’ needed to
achieve a build rate of around 500 per annum. If the need is now less there is
greater opportunity to discount sites which are more sensitive.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
The majority of homes if built on site 4667 would be within 15-20 minutes walk
of Gosforth Park First School and Broadway East First School and within 25
minutes walk of St. Oswald’s RC Primary School. However, site 4926 is more
than 30 minutes walk from these schools. The majority of homes if built on site
4667 would also be within 30-40 minutes walk – and homes on site 4926 would
74
May 2012
be some 20-25 minutes walk – from Westmoor Primary School (North
Tyneside), this involves crossing the A189.
Secondary Schools
The majority of homes if built on site 4667 would be 20-30 minutes walk from
Gosforth East Middle School, 25-35 minutes walk from Gosforth High School,
25-30 minutes walk from Longbenton Community High School. Site 4926 is
approximately 30 minutes walk of George Stephenson High School in
Killingworth.
Primary Schools
600 new homes could generate around 140 primary school age pupils.
Demand for additional places could be lower as for a variety of reasons some
residents will choose for their children to attend schools further afield. Currently
there is effectively no capacity in either Gosforth Park First School or Broadway
East First Schools , nor do they have future forecast capacity. Furthermore
options for physically increasing capacity are limited. However, future residents
of the development of site 4667 would be more proximate to the schools than
some of the existing intake and, over time, could displace demand from further
afield (indeed almost 30% of pupils attending Gosforth Park First School live
outside of the Gosforth wards).
Westmoor Primary school currently is thought to have around some capacity.
Whilst it might be possible for the northern site to be served by Westmoor
School there are current proposals for new housing in that area which could
take up said capacity.
Secondary Schools
Development of 600 dwellings could give rise to around 130 secondary school
age pupils. There is currently limited capacity in Gosforth East Middle and
Gosforth High School and this is not forcast to increase significantly.
Longbenton Community College similarly has limited capacity, both now and in
the future to have any significant numbers of surplus places. Meanwhile,
George Stephenson High is thought to have some capacity.
Additional first and middle school capacity could potentially become available
over time as the development sites would be more proximate to the schools
compared with outlying areas where some pupils are currently residing. The
knock-on effect would be a need to further increase school capacity in northern
Gosforth – most obviously at Great Park. Schools in North Tyneside appear to
be better placed to serve site 4926, however both the walking route and time
are less than ideal and consequently the site is considered to be less suitable
for the development of family homes than other sites under consideration.
75
May 2012
The majority of homes if built at site 4667 would be within a 15-25 minutes walk
of Asda, Gosforth. A new convenience store (Tesco Express or similar) could
be developed on Salters Lane, supported not only by demand arising from the
scale of housing development proposed but also the adjacent business park
and high levels of passing trade.
Site 4926 is a 20 minute walk to the closest food supermarket: Morrison’s at
Killingworth.
Salters Lane: Site 4667
Total score: 17
Walking
Cycle
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary school (Gosforth
Park First School) (score 0-5 points)
15
XX
30
9
supermarket (Asda, Gosforth) (score 0-5 points) or to
22 X
No
X
25 (M)
_ (E)
9 (L)
XX
>25 /
23
9/
8
15 /
11
60
(5km)
18
20 2
No
76
Public
transport
Score
3
18 4
X
0
X
0
2
6
0
May 2012
Salters Lane: Site 4926
Total score: 15
Walking
Cycle
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary school (Westmoor)
(score 0-5 points)
25
XX
School) (George Stephenson High) (score 0-5 points)
25
8
supermarket (Morrisons, Killingworth) (score 0-5 points) or to
25 X
No
X
25 (M)
_ (E)
10 (L)
XX
?/
14
9/
4
70
(5.5km)
25 19
No
Public
transport
1
17 4
X
0
X
0
2
12 /
12
E. Deliverability:
Availability
The landowner of site 4667 (Persimmon) is understood to be strongly
supportive of housing development at the earliest opportunity and have
submitted representations to the Council to this effect. By contrast, site 4926 is
mainly in the ownership of Newcastle City Council and there are no plans to
make the site available for development.
Housing mix
Site 4667 could make a major contribution to meeting any unmet need for family
houses, including larger detached houses within the context of building a
Lifetime Neighbourhood with a wide mix of housing options. A suitable mix
could include 40-50% larger, upper market and upper mid-market homes
(typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed homes), 20-30% mid-market homes (typically
smaller and medium–sized 3-bed homes) and 20-30% higher density, lower
cost market and affordable homes.
Viability
77
Score
6
2
0
May 2012
Timescales
removed from the Green Belt and allocated for housing through the One Core
Strategy and allowing for typical lead-in times, construction could begin in 2017
(or thereabouts). Assuming a single developer and a typical build rate of 50 per
annum, site 4667 could be fully developed inside the Plan period (i.e. by 2030).
Sites 4667 and (to a lesser extent) 4926 represent a reasonably accessible
location for housing development and levels of accessibility could be enhanced
still further through the development of retail and associated facilities on the
Salters Lane frontage. The viability of such provision would be enhanced by the
potential to serve the adjacent business park and passing trade. The sites
could contribute anything up to 600 homes towards the City’s housing
requirement, including a high proportion of family houses.
The development would, however, add to existing pressures on school
provision within the Gosforth area and, on the basis of revised scoring of the
site against Green Belt considerations, would result in significant harm to Green
Belt purposes. It is a matter for debate as to whether these considerations
would be sufficient to preclude housing development (in whole or part).
However, it is proposed that this site is discounted and not included in the One
Core Strategy as a Neighbourhood Growth Area. The overriding factor in this
conclusion is the potential impact on Gosforth Park Nature Reserve and the Site
of Special Scientific Interest.
78
May 2012
VILLAGE GROWTH AREAS
9. DINNINGTON
Site refs.
4657, 4814 & 4815
Addresses:
North Mason Farm land (Cell 1) south of Prestwick
Road
Ownership:
Persimmon & Bellway
Site area (gross):
16.5ha. (gross); 8.6 ha (net)
Estimated capacity:
Up to 400 homes
The proposed Village Growth Area of Dinnington includes these sites. Some 72
submissions and a 104 signature petition object to housing growth in Dinnington
and/or these particular sites on the following grounds:

Development will Increase traffic and congestion to and through Dinington.

More people will result in increased pollution.

Development will have a detrimental impact on wildlife and habitats.

Housing development will result in a loss of local views.

Loss of open space and countryside.

Development would require upgrading the existing drainage.

There is a high pressure gas main on the site.

Proximity to the airport and noise levels could prohibit development.

Access to the site.

Loss of existing 6 properties on the site (4815).

The scale of the proposed development will change the village character
and local identity.
It should be noted that there is no proposal to demolish existing homes and the
Planning System cannot be used to protect private views. The remaining
objections are addressed below. However, it should be noted that while the
priority is for making best use of existing brownfield sites before releasing
greenfield sites we need to establish where the best sites for Green Belt release
are in anticipation that there remains a major shortfall in the supply of
deliverable sites in the short term and beyond particularly in respect of sites for
mid-market family houses.
79
May 2012
In combination sites 4657 and 4815 score 23 out of a possible 25 so, housing
development would not result in unacceptable harm to Green Belt purposes.
This is a slightly higher score than in the original SLR assessment. The revised
score relates to the likely area of Green Belt deletion (following logical
boundaries).
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington (nor towards merging
of Dinnington and Ponteland, 3.5km to W)
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
0.60m of 1.48m perimeter of sites touching area outside
of Green Belt = 40%
3/5
Urban regeneration
5/5
Historic towns
5/5
Urban sprawl
Throckley does not form part of the main urban area and
development of sites would not contribute to urban
sprawl.
5/5
Meanwhile, site 4814 either scores 22 or 23 depending upon whether:
- the entire site would be removed from the Green Belt [440m of 1140m
perimeter of site touches an area outside of the Green Belt = 38%]; or
- only the northern part is removed [440m of 880m perimeter of site touches an
area outside of the Green Belt = 50%].
Highway issues
Transport Assessments will need to be undertaken to show how the traffic
generated from the proposed housing can be satisfactorily accommodated by
the local highway network. Sites 4657 and 4815 both have direct road frontage
to Prestwick Road, while site 4814 is accessed from Mitford Way (estate road).
Topography
In terms of topography all three sites appear to be physically suitable for

Site 4657 has a slight slope: >55m AOD to north-west rising to 65m AOD to
south-eastern boundary with village.

Site 4814 has a moderate slope (approx. 6%): 75m AOD to south rising to
85m+ AOD to north.

Site 4815 also has a slight slope: >55m to west rising to 65m to eastern
boundary with village.
80
May 2012
Sites 4814 and 4815 are reasonably well-contained by the existing landform
and physical features. Site 4657 is somewhat more exposed but there is ample
scope for structural planting to the west and south.
Footpath
A public footpath runs along the eastern boundary of site 4657 and continues
along the western boundary of site 4814. This does not constrain housing
development.
Gas Pipeline
The City’s main High Pressure Gas Pipeline runs through the southern part of
site 4814 (Section A of the Prestwick-Hazlerigg pipeline – HSE reference no.
8398), as well as sites 4936 (Hazlerigg), 4813 (Lower Callerton), 4672
(Walbottle) and 5037 (Newburn). The Health and Safety Executive advises
against building residential properties within 60 metres of this pipeline, which
effectively precludes development of the southern half of site 4814, but leaves
the northern half unaffected.
Aircraft Noise
Dinnington lies in clos e proximity to Ne wcastle International Airpor t and indeed
under UDP Policy POL9 an air port noise assessment would be required for
sites 4657 and 4814. Aircraft noise can pr esent significant re sidential amenity
issues and it is impor tant to ensure t hat the separate interests of residential
amenity and continued and future operation of a major international airport ar e
respected by keeping noise generating and noise sensitive uses apart.
Government policy contained in Planning Policy Guidance note 24; Planning
and Noise, (PPG24) advises on ‘minimising the adverse impacts of noise
without placing unreasonable restrictions on development or adding unduly to
the costs and administrative burdens of business.’ For significant developments
such as airports, it provides a framework to produce noise contours for certain
types of development. This should then be considered in conjunction with
‘Noise Exposure Categories’ (NECs) which advise on the most (or least)
appropriate locations for development. It is also worth noting that the World
Health Organisation, states that a level of 55 LAeq(db), is the onset of serious
annoyance daytime and evening, in outdoor living areas.
NIAL has submitted a plan which shows the 2030 Average Summer Night 8hr
Leq contours and notes that site 4814 lies within the 48-57 dB(A) night
category, toward the onset of significant community annoyance. This lies within
Noise Exposure Category (NEC) B, which considers that ‘noise should be taken
into account when determining planning applications and, where appropriate,
conditions should be imposed to ensure an adequate level of protection against
noise’. It also lies on the boundary of NEC C, whereby ‘planning permission
should not normally be granted’.
The considerable potential for noise disturbance of residents were site 4814 to
be developed for housing is such that it should only be considered for housing
81
May 2012
development in the absence of appropriate alternative sites. However, sites
4657 and 4815 both lie outside of the 48-57 dB(A) night category and together
have the potential to accommodate in the order of 250 homes (a sizeable
increase of around 30%). It is not considered that there is a clear overriding
need for site 4814 to be developed to meet either local or Citywide
requirements.
Other issues
Development of the sites will inevitably re sult in some loss of private views,
however the planning system i s unable to offer sp ecific protection to such
interests.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
Dinnington Village Primary School (First School) is approximately 800m (10
minutes walk) from sites 4657 & 4815 and approximately 1,100m (15 minutes
walk) from site 4814.
Secondary Schools
Dinnington First School is a feeder school for Gosforth East Middle School,
Gosforth Central Middle School and Gosforth High School. These are all
approximately 8km by road from the sites (30 minutes cycle / 20 minutes public
transport travel time). Ponteland Middle and High Schools are located 6km by
road from the sites (20 minutes cycle). If a new school was to be built at Great
Park then this could be within 3 kilometres (30 minutes walk / 10 minutes cycle)
of the Dinnington sites.
Primary Schools
Development of 500 new dwellings in the village could yield around 110
additional primary school age pupils (of which around 80 would be of First
school age). Currently there are few surplus school places at Dinnington First
School. However, it is important to note that of the 150 places in the school, 98
places at the school (more than two-thirds) are currently taken by pupils living
outside of the village and 65 (45%) living outside of Castle Ward. Some 50 of
these (35% of all pupils) live outside of the City and access the popular
Gosforth three-tier system (First/Middle/High schools). Over time, a gradual
increase in demand for pupil places from children residing in new homes in
Dinnington will displace external demand (proximity being a key element of
admission policy). Consequently, the current limited capacity of Dinnington
First School should not present an obstacle to the development of a significant
number of new ‘family’ homes in Dinnington (particularly given that there is
82
May 2012
normally a time lag between new homes being built and demand being
generated for new school places).
Secondary Schools
There is currently limited capacity in the middle schools in Gosforth and at the
high school. Ponteland schools have little capacity.
Development of up to 500 homes could yield around 100 secondary school age
children.
Given the limited spare capacity of middle and high schools in the Gosforth area
and the impact of wider housing developments between the A696 and A1
significant new housing development in Dinnington would need to contribute to
new school provision for children of middle and high school age.
Sites 4657 & 4815 are within 400m (5 minutes) walking distance of the village
convenience store, within the village centre; site 4814 is within 800m (10
minutes) walking distance.
Sites 4657 & 4815 are within 400m (5 minutes) walking distance of bus stops.
Bus services X44 [Stagecoach] provide a 15 minute peak & 30 minute off-peak
service to Newcastle City Centre (25 minute duration) & Gosforth (20 minute
duration).
Note: although there is limited spare capacity at the primary school, this is only
because the majority of places are taken by children living outside of the village;
there is a risk that this external demand will fall over time, especially where new,
more proximate, provision is made available; the provision of new homes will
increase local demand and offset any fall in external demand.
83
May 2012
Dinnington: Site 4657
Total score: 19
Walking
D1(a) – Walking time to nearest primary school (Dinnington)
(score 0-5 points)
9X
D1(b) – Travel time to nearest secondary school (or High
School) (Ponteland High) (score 0-5 points)
75
(Dinnington) (score 0-3 points)
5X
library,
GP
XX
2
D3 – Walking time to Metro Station / Local Rail Station with
60 (M)
_ (E)
8 (L)
XX
2
>>20 /
>20
?/
14
D5 – Travel time to Central Newcastle (score 0-5)
140
(11.5km)
42 38
D6 – Would housing development enhance viability of local
Yes – Dinnington Primary
School*; landowner has also
offered to fund improvements to
local facilities
5
Total score: 11.5
Walking
Public
transport
Score
D1(a) - Walki ng time to neare st prim ary school (Din nington)
(score 0-5 points)
12 X
X
3
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest se condary school (or Hig h
80 24
32
1
D2 (a ) - Walkin g time to defined di
strict/local centre o r
supermarket (score 0-5 points) o r to convenie nce sto re
8X
X
2
No
X
X
0
D3 - Walki ng time to Metro Station / L ocal Rail Station with
frequent serv ice / Exp ress bu s stop (score 0-5 poi nts) or to
63 (M)
_ (E)
13 (L)
XX
D4 - Travel time to neare st 5,000 job s (score 0-10); or time
>>20 /
>20
>20 /
15
145
(12km)
44 40
D6 - Woul d housing development enhance viability of local
Yes - Din
School
84
Cycle
22
Public
transport
Score
X
4
28 1
X
Cycle
nington
3
>20 /
15
2
0
1
>20 /
19
2
0
Primary
2.5
May 2012
Total score: 16.5
Walking
D1(a) - Walking time to neare st prim ary scho ol Dini nngton)
(score 0-5 points)
Cycle
Public
transport
Score
9X
X
4
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest se condary school (or Hig h
75 22
28
1
D2 (a ) - Walkin g time to defined di
supermarket (score 0-5 points) o r to convenie nce sto re
4X
X
3
library,
GP
XX
2
D3 - Walki ng time to Metro Station / L ocal Rail Station with
frequent serv ice / Exp ress bu s stop (score 0-5 poi nts) or to
59 (M)
_ (E)
7 (L)
XX
2
D4 - Travel time to neare st 5,000 job s (score 0-10); or time
>>20 /
>20
>20 /
14
140
(11.5km)
42 37
D6 - Woul d housing development enhance viability of local
Yes –
School*
>20 /
Dinnington Primary
D. Deliverability
Availability
The landowners of all three sites are understood to be strongly supportive of
housing development at the earliest opportunity and have submitted
representations to the Council to this effect. In particular: Persimmon has
already undertaken extensive community consultation in respect of the possible
development of site 4657.
Housing mix
The sites are well-placed to make a major contribution to meeting any unmet
need for family houses, including larger detached houses within the context of
Viability
The sites lie in a high mid value area where new homes can be expected to sell
85
2
0
2.5
May 2012
Timescales
removed from the Green Belt and allocated for housing through a Local Plan
thereabouts). It is estimated that site 4657 would take three to four years to
build out and sites 4814 and 4815 some two to three years. All of the sites
could easily be fully built out within the Plan period.
E. Conclusion & recommendation
To release of the sites for housing development, in addition to other potential
housing opportunities within the village could result in as many of 500 homes
being added to a village of only around 700 properties – a 70% increase. Whilst
some growth would help to sustain and enhance the viability of the village, there
is no overriding need for such a high level of growth.
Consideration should be given to identifying the western part of Dinnington as a
‘village growth area’ for around 250 homes and allocating sites 4657 & 4815 for
housing development in the forthcoming Local Plan. This is in addition to
potential capacity on a site within the existing village boundary for 100 or so
homes.
Land to the south-west (site 4814) is less accessible and subject to greater
aircraft noise than those 3 sites and, as such, it is not recommended that
proposals for housing on this site be supported at this time.
86
May 2012
10. WIDEOPEN
Site Ref:
4707
Address:
Land south of Coach Lane, Wideopen
Ownership:
Ashdale Land & Property
Site area:
Estimated capacity:
80
The proposed Village Growth Area of Hazelrigg/Brunswick/Wideopen includes
this site. Through the consultation process 22 submissions raised the following
issues:

Increase urban sprawl from Newcastle Great Park to Wideopen.

Development would impact on the wildlife corridor connecting Jesmond
Dene and Gosforth Park to the wider environment.

Impact on existing service and facilities.

Increased traffic and congestion.
Site 4707 has been redrawn to more closely align with the landowner’s original
submission. In the original SLR assessment the site scored 19 out of a possible
25; this was on the basis of a score of 2 against ‘urban sprawl’ and 3 against
‘countryside encroachment’. However, the ‘countryside encroachment’ score
was based on the premise that land south of Coach Lane in North Tyneside
would also be removed from the Green Belt (and this cannot be assured); the
original urban sprawl score of 2 did not take into account that Wideopen, whilst
close to the main built-up area, is a separate village and the default score
against this criterion for sites that relate to villages is 5. Taking these changes
into account site 4707 achieves a revised score of 21, as set out in the table
below.
87
May 2012
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington (but would reduce gap
with Wideopen to 300m)
4/5
Countryside
encroachment
380m of 1320m perimeter of sites touching area outside
of Green Belt = 29%; however this assumes that the
cemeteries to the north-east (within North Tyneside)
remain in the Green Belt; if these were to be included as
part of a wider Green Belt deletion the calculation would
be: 680m of 1300m perimeter of sites touching area
outside of Green Belt = 52%, which would attract a score
of 3/5.
2/5
Urban regeneration
5/5
Historic towns
5/5
Urban sprawl
Wideopen does not form part of the main urban area and
development of site would not contribute to urban sprawl.
5/5
Much of the site is considered to be physically suitable for housing, however the
A1 is raised above the level of the site at its western boundary and a significant
area of the site should remain as open space to act as a noise buffer.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
Hazlewood Community Primary School is the nearest school and the majority of
homes if built on the site would be within a 5-10 minutes walk. Greenfields
Community Primary School is within a 15-20 minutes walk.
Secondary Schools
Seaton Burn College is around 2.5km (35 minutes walk / 10 minutes cycle) from
the site.
88
May 2012
Capacity of Local Schools
Primary Schools
The development of 80 dwellings would be expected to yield 20-25 primary
school age children. North Tyneside Council advises that Hazlewood
Community Primary School has a significant number of surplus places.
Greenfields Community Primary School also has a significant number of surplus
places. There is thought to be sufficient local school places to accommodate
this development even after taking into account wider development proposals
within Wideopen/Hazlerigg.
Secondary Schools
The development of 80 dwellings would be expected to yield around 20
secondary school age children. Seaton Burn College (951 pupil places)
currently has enough capacity to accommodate this.
In conclusion there is likely to be sufficient places available in Wideopen
schools (both primary and secondary) to accommodate the development of this
site and indeed the viability of local schools would benefit from the additional
demand arising from this and wider development proposals.
Site 4707 is within 400 metres (5 minutes) walk of the Co-op supermarket at
North Brunton Services and approximately 1.2km (15 minutes) walk from
Wideopen Local Centre.
89
May 2012
Wideopen: Site 4707
Total score: 22.5
Walking
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary school (score 0-5
points)
Cycle
Public
transport
Score
<10 X
X
4
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary school (Seaton
Burn) (score 0-5 points)
35 10
9
4
(Coop @ North Brunton Services) (score 0-3 points)
<10 X
X
2
facilities
No X
X
0
to local bus service stop(score 0-3 points)
45 (M)
13 (E)
3 (L)
XX
>20 /
>20
19 /
9
21 /
14
4
90 (7km)
27
17
2
Yes –local primary schools
3
E. Deliverability:
Availability
The landowner is strongly supportive of housing development at the earliest
opportunity and has submitted representations to the Council to this effect.
Housing mix
The sites are not of sufficient size to create self-contained neighbourhoods but
rather development would complement existing provision in Wideopen. The site
is well-related but less central to existing village services and facilities than sites
elsewhere within the village. Consequently, in accordance with a density
gradient approach, the site is perhaps most suited to being almost exclusively
developed for medium and lower density family homes. As such, it is wellplaced to make a major contribution to meeting any unmet need for family
houses. A suitable mix could include a broadly even mix of larger, upper midmarket homes (typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed homes), and mid-market
homes (typically smaller and medium–sized 3-bed homes), alongside a minority
element (20-30%) of smaller homes (mix of bungalows, houses and
apartments).
90
2.5
May 2012
Viability
Timescales
thereabouts), with completion inside
Site 4707 is capable of representing a suitable, sustainable location for housing
development and could contribute in the order of 80 homes towards the City’s
housing requirement, including a high proportion of family houses.
Consideration should be given to identifying the south-eastern part of Wideoen
as a ‘Village Growth Area’ and allocating site 4707 for housing development in
the forthcoming Local Plan.
91
May 2012
11. HAZLERIGG
Site ref.
4936
Address:
Land to west of Hazlerigg, north of Coach Lane
Ownership:
Mr Ireland
Site area:
30.8 ha. (gross) / 16 ha. (net)
Estimated capacity:
400
(Banks prospective developer)
A Issues raised through consultation
The proposed Village Growth Area of Hazelrigg/Brunswick/Wideopen includes
site 4936. Through the consultation process 22 submissions raised the following
issues:

Site (4936) may have been used for the burial of cattle with foot and mouth
and pigs diagnosed with swine flu.

Allotments and playing pitches will be lost.

Increase urban sprawl from Newcastle Great Park to Wideopen.

Development would impact on the wildlife corridor connecting Jesmond
Dene and Gosforth Park to the wider environment.

Impact on existing service and facilities.

Increase traffic and congestion.
The boundaries of site 4936 have also been redrawn to more closely align with
the landowner’s submission. However, the assessment was already
undertaken on the basis that only this area would be removed from the Green
Belt and thus the original score of 24 out of a possible 25 stands. On this basis
it is considered that the sites make only a modest contribution to Green Belt
purposes.
92
May 2012
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington (nor towards merging
of Hazlerigg and Airport)
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
1.20km of 2.00km perimeter of sites touching area
4/5
Urban regeneration
5/5
Historic towns
5/5
Urban sprawl
Hazlerigg does not form part of the main urban area and
development of site would not contribute to urban sprawl
5/5
Open space
The existing playing field is protected by planning policy and the prospective
developer of the site has indicated that existing allotments will be retained in
situ.
Gas Pipeline
The City’s main High Pressure Gas Pipeline runs through the central part of site
4936 in a north-west to south-east direction, as well as sites 4814 (Dinnington),
4813 (Lower Callerton), 4672 (Walbottle) and 5037 (Newburn). The section of
pipeline that runs thorough site 4946 is section B of the Prestwick-Hazlerigg
pipeline – HSE reference no. 8399). In contrast to the section that affects the
Dinnington site (which effectively has a 60m ‘standoff’), the Health and Safety
Executive only advises against building residential properties within 3 metres of
this particular section of pipeline. This represents only a minor constraint to
development of the site and could be easily accommodated within the housing
layout.
Other issues
In respect of the alleged burial of diseased animals on this site, DEFRA has
been contacted. It has checked this plot of land against its records and
confirms that it has no records of any burial sites.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
93
May 2012
Hazlewood Community Primary School is the nearest school and the majority of
homes if built on the site would be within a 15-20 minutes walk. Greenfields
Community Primary School is within a 25-30 minutes walk.
Secondary Schools
The majority of homes if built on the site would be within around 3.5 to 4km (4045 minutes walk / 10-15 minutes cycle) of Seaton Burn College.
Primary Schools
The development of 400 dwellings would be expected to yield roughly 90
primary school age children. North Tyneside Council advises that Hazlewood
Community Primary School a significant number of surplus places.
Alternatively, Greenfields Community Primary School also have surplus
capacity. There is thought to be sufficient local school places to accommodate
this development even after taking into account wider development proposals
within Wideopen/Hazlerigg.
Secondary Schools
The development of 400 dwellings would be expected to yield around 80
secondary school age children. Seaton Burn College (951 pupil places)
currently has enough capacity to accommodate this increase.
In conclusion there is likely to be sufficient places available in Wideopen
schools (both primary and secondary) to accommodate the development of this
site and indeed the viability of local schools would benefit from the additional
demand arising from this and wider development proposals.
The edge of the site is within 400m (5 minutes walk) of small foodstore that also
contains Hazlerigg Post Office.
94
May 2012
Hazlerigg: Site 4936
Total score: 15.5
Walking
Cycle
points)
15-20 X
40
supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to convenience store (Mills)
(score 0-3 points)
<10 X
No
X
Walking time to Metro Station / Local Rail Station with frequent
service / Express bus stop (score 0-5 points) or to local bus
service stop (score 0-3 points)
60 (M)
_ (E)
10 (L)
XX
D4 - Travel time to nearest 5,000 jobs (score 0-10); or time to
nearest 1,000 jobs (score 0-6)
>25 /
>25
20 /
10
110
(9km)
33 30
Yes – local primary schools
12
Public
transport
Score
X
2
20 3
X
2
X
0
2
21 /
14
E. Deliverability:
Availability
The landowner of site 4936 is understood to have agreed an option with a
developer, who is continuing to promote the site through the Strategic Land
Review.
Housing mix
The site is not of sufficient size to create a self-contained neighbourhood but
rather development would complement existing provision in Hazlerigg /
Brunswick. The site is also not particularly well-related to existing village
services and facilities. Consequently, in accordance with a density gradient
approach, the site is perhaps most suited to being almost exclusively developed
for medium and lower density family homes. As such, it is well-placed to make
a major contribution to meeting any unmet need for family houses. A suitable
mix could include a broadly even mix of larger, upper mid-market homes
(typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed homes), and mid-market homes (typically
smaller and medium–sized 3-bed homes), alongside a minority element (2030%) of smaller homes (mix of bungalows and houses).
95
4
0
2.5
May 2012
Timescale
removed from the Green Belt and allocated for housing through the One Core
Strategy, construction could begin in 2017 (or thereabouts). On the basis of a
single developer and an 8 to 10-year build programme (at a build rate of around
40-50 per annum), it should be possible to complete the development within the
Plan period.
Viability
findings of the Council’s Viability Assessment, housing development of this site
is expected to be economically viable.
Site 4936 is considered to represent a suitable location for housing
development and could contribute in the order of 400 homes towards the City’s
housing requirement, including a high proportion of family houses. It lies in a
different geographical area to other Strategic Land Review sites and therefore
has the potential to contribute to the range and choice of housing needed to
achieve an overall step change in the City’s delivery of family homes. The
accessibility of the site to existing services and facilities is, however, less than
ideal. Indeed, Brunswick and Hazlerigg generally command lower levels of
accessibility to services and facilities than the adjoining settlement of Wideopen.
Indeed both primary schools are located in Wideopen and the A1 creates a
significant degree of ‘severance’.
Consideration should still be given to allocating sites 4936 for housing
development, however further work should be undertaken to identify the scope
for the development to provide new and improved local facilities.
96
May 2012
12. WOOLSINGTON
Site ref.
4924
Address:
Cowell’s Nursery, Woolsington
Ownership:
Various
Site area:
3.6 ha. (gross) / 2 ha. (net)
Estimated capacity: 20
The proposed Village Growth Area of Woolsington includes site 4924. Through
the consultation process 59 submissions raised the following issues:

Loss of countryside and environmental impacts.

Development will result in urban sprawl.

Impact on infrastructure, services and facilities.

Increased Traffic and Congestion.

Encroachment and Urban Sprawl.

Adverse impact on wildlife and habitats.
Woolsington is currently a ‘washed over’ settlement within the Green Belt and
site ref. 4924, whilst bounded by residential development to the north and northwest, is entirely surrounded by Green Belt. Under a strict application of the
methodology the site would fail the assessment on the basis of scoring a zero
against the countryside encroachment criterion. However, for the purposes of
the original assessment it was assumed that Woolsington would be ‘inset’ within
the Green Belt.
Government guidance in PPG2 is clear that if limited development (more than
infilling) or limited expansion is proposed, the village should be inset. The
97
May 2012
decision on whether or not the village should be inset is influenced by a number
of factors, notably whether the village is (or is capable of being) a sustainable
location for housing. This issue is addressed below.
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington, nor with Woolsington
itself (if south-eastern part of site retained undeveloped)
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
Green Belt = 0%; if village inset then 340m of 850m
perimeter of site would touching area outside of Green
Belt = 40%. This would attract a score of 3/5
0/5
Urban regeneration
5/5
Historic towns
5/5
Urban sprawl
Woolsington does not form part of the main urban area
and development of site would not contribute to urban
sprawl
5/5
The site is considered to be physically suitable for housing. There are a large
number of trees on the site (notably towards the southern boundary), which
should be retained. This significantly reduces the developable area to around 2
hectares.
D. Accessibility
Kingston Park Primary School is the nearest school and is approximately a 20
minutes walk from the site. All other primary schools are considerably more
distant.
Secondary Schools
Kenton School is the nearest secondary school and is located some 2 miles (40
minutes walk / 10-15 minutes cycle / 18 minutes public transport travel time)
from the site.
Primary Schools
Kingston Park Primary has limited capacity but currently sufficient surplus
places to accommodate the modest demand generated by the development of
20 or so new homes.
98
May 2012
Secondary Schools
Kenton School has limited capacity but currently sufficient surplus places to
accommodate the modest demand generated by the development of 20 or so
new homes.
The site is more than 1.6km (20 minutes walk) from the nearest convenience
stores, located in and adjacent to Kingston Park District Centre.
The site is slightly over 1.2km (15 minutes) walk to Kenton Bank Foot Metro
Station.
The village bus stops are well within 400 metres (5 minutes) walk. Bus services
nos. 74 [Go North East] & X77/X78 [Stagecoach] provide a 15 minute peak &
30 minute off-peak service to Newcastle City Centre (16 minute duration) and to
Ponteland (6 minute duration).
Woolsington: Site 4924
Total score: 15
Walking
Cycle
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary school (Kingston Park)
(score 0-5 points)
23
XX
Academy) (score 0-5 points)
40
12
D2 (a) - Walking time to defined district/local centre (Kingston
Park) or supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to convenience
store (score 0-3 points)
22 X
No
X
Walking time to Metro Station / Local Rail Station with frequent
service / Express bus stop (score 0-5 points) or to local bus
15 (M)
_ (E)
6 (L)
XX
D4 - Travel time to nearest 5,000 jobs (score 0-10); or time to
>20 /
>20
13 /
4
15 /
8
6
100
(8km)
30
20
2
No 0
99
Public
transport
Score
1
20 3
X
0
X
0
3
May 2012
E. Deliverability:
Availability
The site is owned jointly by three parties, who are all understood to all be
supportive of housing development and indeed have instructed professional
consultants to promote the site for housing development. The site is currently
leased to Cowells Garden Centre, however the freeholders advise that the
current lease is nearing its end and that the freeholder retains the right to
terminate the lease with 6 months notice. As such, the site is capable of being
made available within a short time period.
Housing mix
The village of Woolsington is largely characterised by upper mid-market and
upper market housing, with the north-eastern half of the village developed for
‘Executive Housing’. Given the nature of the site, its limited size and the limited
availability of services in the village, the most suitable form of development
would appear to be further Executive Housing.
Viability
£180k for a 3-bed house and £200k+ for a larger property. Very large
‘Executive’ houses in the village typically sell for in excess of £500k. Based on
the findings of the Council’s Viability Assessment housing development of these
sites would be viable, even assuming a sizeable financial contribution to the
Timescales
thereabouts) and be completed within a couple of years.
The Green Belt currently ‘washes over’ Woolsington – effectively in recognition
that the village lacks the local facilities needed for it to be considered a
sustainable location for significant housing growth. There is no obvious
potential to develop a critical mass of new homes to secure improvements. If
the site was to be allocated for housing the village would need to be ‘inset’
within the Green Belt. Woolsington is located within the same locality as the
potential neighbourhood growth area of Kingston Park / Kenton Bank Foot,
which offers far higher levels of accessibility to local facilities. As such, it is
more appropriate to focus housing growth in that area.
100
May 2012
Woolsington could still accommodate a very limited amount of new housing
without serious harm to wider planning objectives. However, it is recommended
that Woolsington is not identified as a ‘village growth area’.
101
May 2012
13. THROCKLEY (NORTH)
Site ref.
4944 & 4945
Address:
Land at Throckley North Farm
Ownership:
Greenwich Hospital Trust & Newcastle City
Council
Site area (gross):
Estimated capacity:
530
The proposed Village Growth Area of Throckley includes sites 4944 and 4945.
Some 57 submissions and a 664 signed petition objected to the growth of
Throckley and/or the identification of these sites on the grounds that:

There is no justification to develop in the Greenbelt in Throckley.

Development will put extra pressure on existing road network, and increase
congestion through and to the village.

Development would have an adverse impact on the village.

Development would reduce resident’s access to open space and
countryside.

Allotments in the village would be lost.

Development will increase pressure on existing infrastructure and services
particularly Throckley Primary school.

Wildlife and habitats would be lost.

There would be a loss in recreational amenity.

The village character and identity would change.

School playing fields would be lost.

The sites are adjacent to a former coal working.

Brownfield sites should be prioritised.
 Population
growth assumptions are incorrect.

Countryside encroachment & urban sprawl.

Loss of agricultural land.
102
May 2012

Amount of housing proposed is large for a small community with limited
transport & school facilities.

Increased traffic & congestion.

Adverse impact on wildlife & habitats.

Lack of suitable site access.

Loss of school playing fields.

Throckley Primary School playing fields subject to PFI lease with Focus
Education.

Lack of school capacity – especially in Walbottle RC School.

Sites affected by mining legacy.
 Infrastructure

constraints.
Noise impact from adjacent brickworks.
Sites 4944 & 4945 (combined) scored 23 out of a possible 25, indicating only a
limited contribution to meeting Green Belt purposes.
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
1245m of 2320m perimeter of site touching area outside
of Green Belt = 54%
3/5
Urban regeneration
5/5
Historic towns
5/5
Urban sprawl
sprawl.
5/5
Topography (site 4544):
Slight slope: <85m to E rising to >105m to SW, ridge to S of site provides some
visual separation from village.
103
May 2012
Access:
The preferred access to site 4944 is the south via a new junction with Hexham
Road and through site of Fernhill House (recently acquired by Greenwich
Hospital Trust) and part of site of Throckley Primary School (subject to
negotiation with Newcastle City Council). As a minimum a 10 to 15 metre strip
along the western boundary of site 4945 could unlock development of site 4944
but preferably more to allow development to front onto access.
As a fallback position, it may be possible to either upgrade Drove Road to the
west or create a new access further to the west, through land also in the
ownership of Grenwich Hospital Trust and in respect of which it has longer-term
aspirations for housing development. Both options are likely to require
acquisition of existing properties and would be more remote from the centre of
the village.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
Throckley Primary School is approximately 5 minutes walking distance from the
site entrance and 15 minutes from the most distant parts. The majority of
homes if built would be within a 10 minutes walk and accessibility could
potentially be further enhanced through the creation of a footpath link to the
south-east of the site.
Secondary Schools
The majority of homes if built would be within 2km (20-25 minutes walk / 5-10
minutes cycle) of Walbottle Campus, which is the closest secondary school.
Primary Schools
primary school age children. Throckley Primary School can accommodate up to
315 pupils and currently has enough capacity to accommodate this number of
additional pupils. It was built as a middle school in 2003 through the Private
Finance Initiative but became redundant in 2005 (following the decision to move
to two-tier education in the outer-west of the City) before providing for the
relocation of Throckley Primary School (which does not currently require
premises of this size). The development of this site would make a substantial
contribution to making best use of a recently-constructed but under-utilised
asset.
104
May 2012
Secondary Schools
secondary school age children. In 2011/12 Walbottle Campus had significant
surplus capacity and this is forecast to rise without additional local development
to boost its pupil roll.
In conclusion, not only is there sufficient capacity in local schools to serve the
development of these sites but significant new housing development is required
to maintain and enhance the viability of local schools.
The entrance to the sites is within 800 metres (10 minutes) walk of Throckley
Local Centre, which incorporates a Sainsbury’s supermarket. From the
northern part of the site this is approximately a 1.6km (20 minutes) walk.
Throckley (north): site 4944
Total score: 25.5
Walking
D1(a) - Wal king time to nearest pri mary scho ol (Throckley )
(score 0-5 points)
Public
transport
Score
<4 X
X
4
D1(b) - Trav el time to neare st secon dary sch ool (Walbottle
Campus) (score 0-5 points)
<25 8
19
4
D2 (a) - Walkin g time to defined distri ct/local centre or
supermarket (Th rockley) (score 0 -5 poi nts) o r to co nvenience
<15 X
X
3
No
Walking time to Metro Station / Lo cal Rail Station with frequent
service / Exp ress bus stop (score 0 -5 points) or to local bu s
105 (M)
15 (E)
7 (L)
XX
D4 - T ravel time to nearest 5,000 jobs (score 0-10); or time to
?/
23
22 /
7
140
41 41
D6 - Would hou sing d evelopment e nhance viabil ity of local
Yes – Throck ley Pr imary;
Walbottle Campus; Throckley
Local Centre
105
Cycle
0
3
>25 /
15
4
0
7.5
May 2012
Throckley (north): site 4945
Total score: 25.5
Walking
D1(a) - Walking time to neare st prim ary school (Th rockley)
(score 0-5 points)
Cycle
Public
transport
Score
<5 X
X
5
D1(b) - T ravel time to neare st se condary school (Walb ottle
<20 6
15
4
D2 (a) - Walking time to defined di
supermarket (Throckley) (score 0-5 points) or to convenience
<10 X
X
4
No
Walking time to Metro Station / Local Rail Station wit
h
frequent serv ice / Express bus stop (score 0-5 point s) o r to
100 (M)
11 (E)
3 (L)
XX
D4 - Travel time to neare st 5,000 jobs (score 0-10); or time
?/
19
19 /
5
>20 /
11
4
135
40
37
0
Yes – Thr
ockley Pr imary;
Walbottle Campus ; Throck ley
Local Centre
0
3
D. Deliverability
Availability
The landowner of site 4944 is actively pursuing housing development and is
looking to agree access through site 4945 (to the south), which is owned by
Newcastle City Council.
Timescale
removed from the Green Belt and allocated for housing through the Local
Development Framework, construction could begin in 2017 (or thereabouts).
On the basis of a 10-year build programme (at a build rate of around 50 per
annum), it should be possible to complete the development within the Plan
period.
Housing mix
The sites are not of sufficient size to create self-contained neighbourhoods but
rather development would complement existing provision in Throckley. The
sites are well-related but less central to existing village services and facilities
than sites elsewhere within the village. Consequently, in accordance with a
density gradient approach, the sites are perhaps most suited to being almost
exclusively developed for medium and lower density family homes. As such,
they are well-placed to make a major contribution to meeting any unmet need
for family houses. A suitable mix could include a broadly even mix of larger,
106
7.5
May 2012
upper mid-market homes (typically larger 3 bed and 4+ bed homes), and midmarket homes (typically smaller and medium–sized 3-bed homes), alongside a
minority element (20-30%) of smaller homes (mix of bungalows, houses and
apartments).
Viability
E. Conclusion & recommendation
Sites 4944 & 4945 are capable of representing a suitable, sustainable location
for housing development and could contribute in the order of 530 homes
towards the City’s housing requirement, including a high proportion of family
houses.
Consideration should be given to allocating sites 4944 & 4945 for housing
development.
107
May 2012
14. THROCKLEY (SOUTH)
Site ref.
4947
Address:
Land north of Newburn Grange
Ownership:
Northumberland Estates
Site area (gross):
2.9 ha
Estimated capacity:
70
The proposed Village Growth Area of Throckley includes site 4947. Some 57
submissions and a 664 signed petition objected to the growth of Throckley
and/or the identification of this site on the grounds that:

There is no justification to develop in the Greenbelt in Throckley.

Development will put extra pressure on existing road network, and increase
congestion through and to the village.

Development would have an adverse impact on the village.

Development would reduce resident’s access to open space and
countryside.

Allotments in the village would be lost.

Development will increase pressure on existing infrastructure and services.

Wildlife and habitats would be lost.

There would be a loss in recreational amenity.

The village character and identity would change.

School playing fields would be lost.

The sites are adjacent to a former coal working.
108
May 2012
Site 4947 scored 23 out of a possible 25, indicating only a limited contribution to
meeting Green Belt purposes.
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington (and would preserve
gap between Throckley and Newburn)
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
Green Belt = 55%
3/5
Urban regeneration
5/5
Historic towns
5/5
Urban sprawl
sprawl.
5/5
The site is suitable for housing, albeit it has a number of physical constraints to
development. Both an undulating topography and the presence of underground
services restrict the layout and the capacity of the site.
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
The majority of homes if built on the site would be within 800m (10 minutes)
walk of Newburn Manor Primary School and 1.5km (20 minutes) walk of
Throckley Primary School.
Secondary Schools
The majority of homes if built would be within 1.5km (15-20 minutes walk / 5-10
minutes cycle) of Walbottle Campus, which is the closest secondary school.
Primary Schools
Development of 70 homes could yield approximately 15 children of primary
school age. There is limited capacity at Newburn Manor Primary school.
However, 28% of pupils attending Newburn Manor (Oct. ’11) currently reside
within Lemington ward. Housing on this site would be more proximate to
Newburn Manor school than some of the areas where existing pupils currently
reside and over the course of time demand from the new homes could displace
109
May 2012
some of the demand arising from more distant locations and rebalancing would
over time occur.
Some parents may prefer for their children to attend Throckley Primary School
which currently has significant surplus capacity.
Secondary Schools
Development of 70 homes could yield approximately 15 children of secondary
school age. In 2011/12 Walbottle Campus had some surplus capacity, and this
is forecast to rise without additional local development to boost its pupil roll.
development of this site but significant new housing development is required to
maintain and enhance the viability of local schools.
Throckley (south): Site 4947
Total score: 29.5
Walking
D1(a) - Walking time to nearest primary school (Newburn)
(score 0-5 points)
Public
transport
Score
<10 X
X
4
D1(b) - Travel time to nearest secondary school (Walbottle
<20 6
9
4
supermarket (Throckley) (score 0-5 points) or to
9X
X
4
facilities
Throckley Primary Care Centre
95 (M)
3 (E)
3 (L)
XX
?/
17
14 /
4
17 /
9
4
135
40
31
0
Yes – Throckley Primary;
Walbottle Campus; Throckley
Local Centre
110
Cycle
1
5
7.5
May 2012
E. Deliverability:
Availability
The landowner of site 4947 is supportive of housing development.
Timescale
and allowing for typical lead-in times, construction could begin as early as 2017,
with completion inside two to three years.
Housing mix
for family houses, particularly larger detached houses. The development would
also be expected to contribute an element (15%) of affordable housing – the
type, size and location of which should take account of evidence of local need.
Viability
Site 4947 is suitably sustainable location for housing development.
111
May 2012
15. WALBOTTLE
Site ref.
4672
Address:
Land west of The Paddock
Ownership:
Northumberland Estates
Site area (gross):
6.5Ha
Estimated capacity:
60
The proposed Village Growth Area of Walbottle includes site 4672. Some 48
submissions objected to the growth of Walbottle and/or the identification of this
site on the grounds that:

Growth would have an adverse impact on wildlife.

The loss of countryside could have a detrimental effect on the health of
residents.

Brownfield development should be prioritised over greenbelt development.
 Additional housing development would have a significant impact on existing
services and infrastructure, particularly the road network and increased
traffic on B6528.

Walbottle would lose its local identity.

Development in Walbottle would result in urban sprawl.

The site 4672 is adjacent to the World Heritage site of the Hadrian's Wall
and the Vallum Aelium.

The site 4672 is crossed south to north by a gas pipeline.

The site 4672 contains allotments.

Access to the site 4672, particularly access to the north which could damage
landscape.
112
May 2012
meeting Green Belt purposes.
Consideration
Coalescence
Countryside
encroachment
Urban regeneration
Historic towns
Urban sprawl
Comment
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington. Development of site
could narrow gap with Throckley (occupied by Walbottle
Dene) to no less than 200m and should be highly
defensible.
400m of 1090m perimeter of entire site touching area
outside of Green Belt = 37%; most likely development
area: 310m/930m = 33%.
Walbottle does not form part of the main urban area and
sprawl.
Score
5/5
3/5
5/5
5/5
5/5
Archeology
Development of the northern part would have an unacceptable adverse impact
on the Vallum (a Scheduled Ancient Monument) and its setting. The area to the
south of the allotments still has potential.
Gas Pipeline
The City’s main High Pressure Gas Pipeline runs through site 4672 in a northsouth direction, as well as through sites 4813 (Lower Callerton), 4814
(Dinnington), 4936 (Hazlerigg) and 5037 (Newburn). The section of pipeline
that runs thorough site 4672 is the River Tyne South / Tanfield PrestwickHazlerigg pipeline – HSE reference no. 7876). In contrast to the section that
affects the Dinnington site (which effectively has a 60m ‘standoff’), and the
constraints plan previously provided by the landowners of the Callerton sites
(which showed a 46m standoff either side of the pipeline) it has now been
established that the Health and Safety Executive only advises against building
residential properties within 3 metres of this particular section of pipeline. This
represents only a minor constraint to development of the site and could be
accommodated within the housing layout without undermining development
viability.
113
May 2012
D. Accessibility
Primary Schools
The majority of homes if built on the site would be within a 5 to 10 minutes walk
of Walbottle Village Primary School.
Secondary Schools
The majority of homes if built on the site would be within a 10-15 minute walk of
Walbottle Campus, which could be shortened to 5-10 minutes with the creation
of a footpath link to the north (through land in the same ownership).
Primary Schools
Approximately 60 new homes could be expected to yield around 15 primary
school age children. Walbottle Village Primary School currently has some
surplus capacity and this is forecast to rise without additional local development
to boost its pupil roll. Other primary schools in the wider area are also identified
as having spare capacity.
Secondary Schools
Development of 60 homes could yield approximately 15 children of secondary
school age. In 2011/12 Walbottle Campus had some surplus capacity and this
is forecast to rise without additional local development to boost its pupil roll.
development of this site but significant new housing development is required to
maintain and enhance the viability of local schools.
The site is within 800 metres (10 minutes walk) of a small Costcutter
convenience store at Hawthorne Terrace and 400 metres (5 minutes walk of the
Village Post Office). The edge of the site is approximately 1.6km (20 minutes
walk) from the far larger Sainsbury’s supermarket in Throckley Local Centre.
114
May 2012
Walbottle: Site 4672
Total score: 27.5
Walking
points)
Cycle
Public
transport
Score
5-10 X
X
4
10-15 <5
15
5
(Costcutter) (score 0-3 points)
5-10 X
X
2
facilities
No X
X
0
85 (M)
5 (E)
5 (L)
XX
>20 /
>20
12 /
8
130
(10km)
37 37
Yes – Walbottle Primary;
Walbottle Campus; village shop
5
17 /
10
E. Deliverability:
Availability
The landowner is understood to be strongly supportive of housing development
at the earliest opportunity.
Housing mix
for family houses, particularly larger detached houses. The development would
also be expected to contribute an element (15%) of affordable housing – the
type, size and location of which should take account of evidence of local need.
Viability
The site lies in a mid value area where new homes can be expected to sell (at
£160k for a 3-bed house and £175k+ for a larger property. Indeed, 4-bed
detached properties at The Paddock (immediately adjoining the site) have
recently sold for around the £250k mark. This suggests that the above values,
whilst typical for the surrounding area, could be on the conservative side for this
part of Walbottle. Nevertheless, based on the findings of the Council’s Viability
Assessment housing development of this site would be viable but not to the
115
4
0
7.5
May 2012
extent that development can withstand making a sizeable financial contribution
to the major infrastructure required to support major housing development in the
wider area. But, major new infrastructure is not specifically required to allow for
the development of the Walbottle site in isolation.
Timescales
begin as early as 2017, with completion inside two to three years.
It is considered that development of the northern part of the site (including the
allotment gardens) would have an unacceptable adverse impact on the Vallum
Scheduled Ancient Monument or its setting. By contrast, the southern part of
the site (south of the allotment gardens) is capable of representing a suitable,
sustainable location for housing development and could contribute in the order
of 60 family homes towards the City’s housing requirement.
Consideration should be given to allocating the southern half of site 4672 for
116
May 2012
16. NEWBURN
Site ref.
5037 (eastern part)
Address:
Tyne Rowing Club
Ownership:
Various
Site area (gross):
tbc
Estimated capacity:
10
None
meeting Green Belt purposes. It is worth noting that, opposite the site in
Gatehead, the Green Belt boundary is drawn some distance further west of
Newburn Bridge and excludes a gas compound when on the Newcastle side of
the river the equivalent gas compound is included within the Green Belt.
Irrespective of the development potential of this site, the boundaries appear
inconsistent and consideration could be given to reviewing the boundary in this
location so as to delete both the gas compound and Tyne Rowing Club from the
Green Belt.
Consideration
Comment
Score
Coalescence
Ponteland, Airport or Cramlington. Development of site
could narrow gap with Throckley (occupied by Walbottle
Dene) to no less than 200m and should be highly
defensible.
Green Belt = 75%.
Walbottle does not form part of the main urban area and
sprawl.
5/5
Countryside
encroachment
Urban regeneration
Historic towns
Urban sprawl
117
4/5
5/5
5/5
5/5
May 2012
Much of site 5037, as originally defined, is unsuitable for housing development.
Newburn Leisure Centre is protected open space and is also subject to risk
from flooding. Immediately to the east of this is a gas compound, which offers
no potential for redevelopment and further east is the clubhouse of Tyne
Rowing club. There may be scope to redevelop this site for a very modest
housing development. However, the site lies in a wider area of archaeological
interest and is part of a wildlife corridor further detailed investigation of these
issues would be required to support a planning application or allocation.
D. Accessibility
The site is approximately 10-15 minutes walk of Newburn Manor Primary
School and 2.5km (30-35 minutes walk / 10-15 minutes cycle) of Walbottle
Campus.
The site presents limited opportunity for new housing development. Only
approximately 10 dwellings could be accommodated on the site of Tyne Rowing
Club, typically yielding just 5 school age children. Such a modest scale of
development would have negligible impact on local services.
118
May 2012
Walking
Newburn: Site 5037
Total score: 28.5
(score 0-5 points)
10-15
(or High School) (score 0-5 points)
30-35 10-1
D2 (a) - Walking time to defined district/local
centre or supermarket (score 0-5 points) or to
Public
transport
XX
5
10-15
5
D4 - Travel time to nearest 5,000 jobs (score 010); or time to nearest 1,000 jobs (score 0-6)
>20 /
>20
12 /
8
D5 - Travel time to Central Newcastle (score 05)
130
(10km)
40
(10km)
D6 - Would housing development enhance
viability of local facilities and services?
XX
4
5
17 /
<10
6
36 0
Yes – would help to support viability of
Newburn Local Centre
E. Deliverability:
Availability
There is no firm indication from the landowner that the site will be made
available for housing development.
Housing mix
The site could make only a very modest contribution to meeting the City’s
unmet requirement for family houses but could equally give rise to development
of riverside apartments. Any houses would be more likely to take the form of
terraced, rather than detached, homes.
Viability
The site lies in a medium value area where new homes can be expected to sell
(at current prices) for around £167 per square foot – i.e. approximately £105k
for a 2-bed flat and £145k for a 3-bed house. Based on the findings of the
Council’s Viability Assessment housing could be viable but may not achieve a
sufficient financial return for the landowner to justify relocation of the existing
facility.
119
3
5
library; leisure centre; doctor; community
centre
Walking time to Metro Station / Local Rail
Station with frequent service / Express bus stop
(score 0-5 points) or to local bus service stop
(score 0-3 points)
Score
3
XX
<5
D2 (b) - Majority of homes within 10 minutes
walk of facilities
Cycle
2.5
May 2012
Although the site represents a sustainable location for housing development, it
has limited potential and there is no indication that it would be made available
for redevelopment within the Plan period. For this reason it is discounted.
Nevertheless, the eastern part of the site is largely developed and does not
make a major contribution to the openness of the Green Belt in this location.
Removal from the Green Belt would not result in significant harm to the
purposes of the Green Belt and the revised Green Belt boundary would be more
consistent with that immediately to the south in Gateshead.
120

NEWCASTLE CITY COUNCIL STRATEGIC LAND REVIEW

Transcription

Similar documents

Whispering Pine - The Villages

The Hills at Charlesworth sustainable community

look at the luxury! - Arverne by the Sea

The Chalkline - fortsmithhomebuilders.com

- PineCone Log Homes

KICC TV Media Pack

GTC Dukes Park Case Study

Tactical Vest

KEAGAN KEAGAN - Tanyard Cove

Best In History! - Youth Homes of Mid