Strategic Planning Committee 15 March 2017

Application No: 16/04408/OUT

Proposal: Application for outline planning permission with some matters reserved for construction of 400 residential dwellings, associated roads, paths, car parking, drainage and landscaping.

Site Address Land West Of Cheviot View, Rotary Way, Ponteland, Northumberland

Applicant: Banks Property Inkerman House, St John's Road, Meadowfield, Durham, DH7 8XL

Agent: Mr Justin Hancock Inkerman House, St John's Road, Meadowfield, Durham DH7 8XL

Ward Ponteland East And Stannington

Parish Ponteland

Valid Date: 29 November 2016 Expiry Date:

28 February 2017

Case Officer Details:

Name: Mrs Judith Murphy

Job Title: Principal Planning Officer

Tel No: 01670 622640

Email: judith.murphy@northumberland.gov.uk

This material has been reproduced from Ordnance Survey digital map data with the permission of the Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office © Crown Copyright (Not to Scale)

1. Introduction 1.1 Under the provisions of the Council’s current Scheme of Delegation, this application is being reported to the Strategic Planning Committee as it proposes a major development that raises important strategic planning policy issues and represents a departure from the adopted Development Plan. The application has also generated a significant level of public interest with high numbers of letters both in objection to and support of the scheme. 1.2 To allow Members to fully understand the purpose of the application and the various elements of the proposal in greater detail, the description of the development set out below will be broken down into a number of separate elements which, together, will explain the overall concept of the scheme, its objectives and its key guiding principles. 2. Description of the Site and Proposal 2.1 Outline planning permission is sought for the construction of up to 400 residential dwellings and associated roads, paths, car parking, drainage and landscaping on land at West Clickemin Farm, Ponteland. All aspects of the development are reserved for subsequent approval with the exception of two highway access points into the site, the details of which form part of this application. 2.2 The site is located to the south east of Ponteland town centre and adjoins the main built-up part of the settlement. Ponteland itself serves as a popular commuter settlement located approximately 10km north west of Newcastle City Centre. 2.3 The site is directly accessed from the A696 to the east which is a significant arterial road providing a link from the A1 and Newcastle to the A68 at Otterburn. The site also has access from Rotary Way to the south. Newcastle International Airport is located to the south east of the site at a distance of approximately 1.5km 2.4 The site measures 21.5 hectares in area and is bound on its eastern side by a row of houses (Cheviot View) which front the A696 and back onto the site. Direct access to the A696 from the application site is limited to a 200 metre section north of Cheviot View. The northern end of the site borders further residential properties (Fairney Edge) and the bridge over the Fairney Burn with the western boundary of the site following the route of the Fairney Burn itself. 2.5 Beyond the Fairney Burn to the north west is the existing Ponteland Leisure Centre site which is the subject of a current application (ref: 16/04576/CCD) for demolition and redevelopment with new education and leisure facilities. That application is also due to be considered by Strategic Planning Committee as part of this meeting agenda. Further to the west are the existing Ponteland Middle School and Community High School sites. 2.6 The site slopes from a high point in its north eastern corner down to the Fairney Burn. Within the development site are 12 individual trees, and there are also 18 highway verge trees along Rotary Way, which may be affected by the proposals to create new access points into the site to serve the proposed development.

2.7 There are two owners within the red line boundary of the application site. The largest ownership belongs with Click Em In Farm located immediately east of the A696, with the southern narrow field in a separate ownership. 2.8 The application is supported by an illustrative concept masterplan which shows how the site could be developed with up to 400 dwellings. This also identifies other key features of the site proposals including the following:

400 dwellings incorporating a mix of detached and semi-detached

properties;

15% affordable housing provision;

Main spine road connecting northern and southern access points;

Secondary roads accessing the residential areas;

24% on-site open space including sustainable drainage basins; and

Provision of new strategic footpath links to a disused former railway line

(bridleway) to the west and south west, to the proposed new school and

leisure proposals on the immediately adjacent site to the north west, and

also to other destinations north and south of the site.

A number of constraints and opportunities in and around the application site have been identified with the most significant in terms of dictating the indicative layout of the scheme being as follows:

The flood risk area associated with Fairney Burn;

The need to maintain security around the perimeter of the proposed new

education and leisure facilities;

Relatively limited options for vehicular access to the site; and

To protect key views from the Green Belt.

Other constraints have had less of a significant impact on the indicative scheme layout but are still considered to be important considerations in this case:

Services including sewer and electricity;

Existing trees; and

The need to maintain a vehicular access to the residential dwelling,

Coruisk, which is located towards the south east corner of the land

associated with this application and which the proposed development

would effectively wrap around.

2.9 The concept masterplan has been designed to maximise pedestrian connectivity and permeability to Ponteland town centre and also across the Fairney Burn to the proposed new education and leisure campus whilst maintaining on-site amenity space. Green spaces have been incorporated into the indicative masterplan and provision has been made for a hierarchy of recreational needs through the incorporation of open spaces interspersed within the housing layout, and 5.2 ha of formal amenity green space elsewhere within the site equating to 24% of its total area.

2.10 The main link through the site would be provided by a spine road which would also incorporate a landscape function providing a green corridor through the heart of the development. The existing property, Coruisk, already benefits from an existing right of access across the site which would be retained, however there would clearly be superior access provided by the new estate road. 2.11 The internal site layout would be made up of a series of traditional estate roads, designed around a pedestrian friendly approach, integrating with the surrounding community. It would link existing and proposed streets and provide direct routes to bus stops. The network would be permeable, encouraging walking and cycling and making the area easier to navigate. 2.12 A total of 15% affordable housing is proposed in this case which would be provided off-site in a more central location within Ponteland through a significant financial contribution in line with Policy 19 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy. At the time of writing the report it is envisaged that the affordable housing would be provided on the existing Richard Coates Middle School site once this becomes available for redevelopment. 2.13 It is likely that the development would be split into a number of discreet plots which could potentially be built out by different house builders. One option would be to split the site between the northern and southern access points, or to allow a southern access followed by a split between the east and west of the site from the spine road. As this is an outline application, this level of detail and the proposed phasing for delivery of the scheme would be dealt with at the reserved matters stage. 2.14 The submitted masterplan is indicative, however it does set out the proposed standards for density, movement and green infrastructure. It also provides the general baseline for the assessment of the technical reports which can be suitably controlled via planning conditions and at the subsequent reserved matters stage. 2.15 The proposals have been screened under Part 10(b) of Schedule 2 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 and found unlikely to give rise to any significant environmental effects (positive or negative, individually or cumulatively) and the proposal is considered not to require the preparation of an Environmental Impact Assessment.

3. Planning History

Reference Number: 16/03253/SCREEN

Description: Screening opinion for proposed 400 residential dwellings, roads,

paths, car parking, drainage and landscaping.

Status: Issued - EIA not required

Of particular relevance to the consideration of this application is the following application

which is included on the agenda for this Strategic Planning Committee meeting and falls

to be considered in the context of this application:

Reference Number: 16/04576/CCD

Description: Outline planning application with all matters reserved for the demolition of

the existing leisure centre and replacement with a new leisure centre, library, Primary

school and Secondary school.

Status: Pending Consideration

Also of relevance, albeit not related to this proposal, is the following application for a

new garden settlement at The Dissington Estate which is included on the agenda for this

meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee:

Reference Number: 16/04672/OUTES

Description: A 'hybrid' planning application seeking: a) Outline planning permission with all matters reserved for an exemplar Garden Village comprising up to 2,000 dwellings, and space / facilities for employment, commercial, agricultural and leisure uses, and associated infrastructure; and b) Full planning permission for: i) Strategic flood alleviation measures; and ii) Demolition of a small number of buildings. Status: Pending Consideration

4. Consultee Responses

Ponteland Town Council

Objection on the following grounds:

The application is not in accordance with the Castle Morpeth Local Plan.

The development is wholly unacceptable in principle and constitutes inappropriate development in the green belt; no compelling case for exceptional circumstances have been demonstrated.

Proposal gives rise to further concerns regarding traffic impact, ecological impact and limited and unknown contributions in advance of the Council’s adoption of CIL.

Notes that the Town Council supports the objections made by local residents.

Highways Authority No objection subject to conditions

Countryside/Public Rights Of Way

No objection provided Public Footpath No. 36 and No. 12 and Public Bridleway No. 54 are protected throughout.

NCC Building Conservation

No objection

County Archaeologist No objection subject to conditions

County Ecologist No objection in principle, however notes that ‘a complete tree survey report should be submitted’ and that ‘the presence and effect to bats should be established before planning permission is granted.

West Tree And Woodland Officer

No response received

Public Protection No objection

Waste Management

No response received

Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA)

No objection subject to conditions

Highways England Seek to understand the impact of the proposals on the Strategic Road Network in more detail.

The Coal Authority No objection

Northumbrian Water No objection subject to conditions. Also notes that the application should be carried out in accordance with the submitted Flood Risk Assessment and Drainage Strategy.

Fire & Rescue Service

No objection subject to it being ensured that all dead end access roads in excess of 20m are provided with turning facilities.

Environment Agency FRA does not comply with the requirements set out in Paragraph 9 of the Technical Guide to the NPPF. The FRA does not provide a suitable basis for assessment to be made of the flood risks arising from the proposed development. In order to overcome the objection, a revised FRA should be submitted which covers the deficiencies and demonstrates that the development will not increase risk elsewhere and where possible reduces flood risk overall.

Newcastle International Airport

Initial Comments (2 February 2017) - NIA objects to the application as it currently stands, on the grounds of airfield safety. A bird strike risk assessment must be undertaken to determine the potential increased risk of bird strikes stemming from the development, and appropriate management plan put in place in relation to the identified risk. This objection could be removed if this requirement if undertaken satisfactorily. NIA also object on the grounds of impact on the road network serving the airport. The airport considers that a proportionate contribute should be made to mitigate the impact of the development on the airport access roundabout on the A696. The capacity assessment presented in the TA should also be revised to consider the points set out in this response. The airport is also concerned about the potential impact on the A696/A1 junction, and so the strategic road access to the airport. The cumulative impact of planned and consented development is likely to be severe, and the proposed development would contribute to this impact. At present there is not a suitable strategy in place to mitigate this. Further Comments (22 February 2017) - Provided that the recommendations in the Bird Strike Risk Assessment are applied as specified above, as well as those set out in the

original submission related to lighting and physical development, NIA would be in a position to remove their objection to the application on the grounds of aerodrome safeguarding. NIA’s previous objection to the scheme on the basis of the projected impact of traffic generated from the scheme remains valid. It is hoped that a resolution can be found to enable the delivery of additional housing to support the growth of the region’s population and economy, without adversely impacting on the projected growth of the airport. Further Comments (3 March 2017) - Conditions suggested

5. Public Responses Neighbour Notification

Number of Neighbours Notified 102

Number of Objections 937

Number of Support 7

Number of General Comments 5

Notices Site Notice - Departure from Local Plan - 7th December 2016 Press Notice - Morpeth Herald - 8th December 2016 Summary of Responses: At the time of writing the report, 7 comments have been received supporting the proposed development on the following grounds:

The proposals will provide opportunities for younger people and young families to live in Ponteland;

It is a development that is needed in the area; and

The objections can be easily addressed. At the time of writing the report, 937 comments have been received objecting to the proposed development on the following grounds:

It will result in a loss of character to Ponteland Village and will impact on

the Conservation Area;

The proposal increases the flood risk to Ponteland and Eland Haugh

estate and will result in additional surface water to Fairney Burn - no

realistic solutions have been proposed;

Allowing the development would be detrimental to the purpose of the

green belt, it would reduce the separation between Ponteland and

Newcastle City resulting in urban sprawl and would encroach on the open

countryside;

The proposed development is not in accordance with the NPPF (Para 83)

which states that green belt boundaries should only be altered in

exceptional circumstances, through the preparation or review of the Local

Plan. The application is premature of the Core Strategy examination and it

is inappropriate to determine the application in advance of this;

There is no objectively assessed need for housing in the area, which

justifies building on green belt land - exceptional circumstances for the

release of green belt have not been demonstrated;

Over 50% of the County’s green belt deletion is centred about Ponteland

and is disproportionate to the rest of the County;

The application should be considered alongside other major applications

(refs: 16/04672/OUTES and 16/04576/CCD) and consideration should be

given to the cumulative impacts they will have on Ponteland and the

surrounding area;

The proposed development is contrary to the Castle Morpeth Local Plan;

The statement by the applicant that the proposal will help meet housing

targets is flawed - DCLG (2014) projections for housing in Northumberland

are 11,634, whereas Northumberland County Council make provision for

at least 26,320 new homes in the county. The housing target is flawed an

overambitious;

The cumulative impact on the population increase of the development, and

other developments in Ponteland, will create a requirement for school

pupil places greater than the pupil places created by the proposed school

development;

Statutory bodies, including Gateshead Council, Newcastle City Council,

Highways England and Newcastle Airport have all raised concerns

regarding traffic junction incapacity as a result of the proposal which will

contribute to a significant overload of the regional road networks;

Ponteland’s roads are already congested and parking is already an issue,

this will be made worse by the proposed development and will cause road

safety issues;

The increase in traffic as a result will have an adverse impact on

residential amenity;

The proposed access on Rotary Way and the A696 will create two

dangerous junctions on busy roads;

Public transport in the area is poor and inadequate to service the

proposed development;

Development is not practical without Ponteland by-pass, no provisions

have been made for this;

The proposed development is within open countryside and beyond the

settlement limits;

Should green belt land be released for the Dissington Garden Village,

there will be no need for the houses proposed at this site;

The proposed development will place increased pressure on services in

the area, including GP Surgeries and schools, which are already at

capacity;

The land provides a landscape setting of visual importance to the area;

Will result in the general degradation in the quality of the local

environment;

The proposed development is too close to the airport and will be impacted

by noise;

The proposed development will have a detrimental impact on wildlife and

priority species;

Building on the green belt impacts on quality of life;

Will impact on the residential amenity of residents in Cheviot View;

The increase in residents will result in insufficient recreational provisions;

The proposed development does not provide the type of housing that is

needed in the area, there is no evidence or provisions for affordable

housing, homes for first time buyers or for older residents;

There is a lack of utility infrastructure to support additional homes which

will impact upon water, gas, sewerage and electricity;

The proposed development contradicts the emerging Ponteland

Neighbourhood Plan;

The proposed development goes against local opposition; and

The amount of houses proposed is excessive and will increase the

population of Ponteland by over 80%.

A number of the objections received are not considered to be material planning considerations as summarised below:

At some point the Metro will need to be extended to Ponteland and this

development will prejudice such an extension;

The application should be assessed alongside the school/leisure

application as it will provide the funding for the development;

The statement refers to the creation of 120 jobs, however these would

disappear after the construction period; and

The development is money-driven.

The above is a summary of the comments received at the time of writing the report. A verbal update in respect of any correspondence received post-completion of this report, up until the date of the Committee meeting, will be provided at the Committee meeting. The full written text of all comments is available on the Council website at: https://publicaccess.northumberland.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?activeTab=documents&keyVal=OHEVTWQS0CR00 6. Legislative Context 6.1 In determining the planning application, the Council has the following main statutory duties to perform:

(1) To have regard to the provisions of the development plan, so far as material

to the application, any local finance considerations so far as material to the

application, and any other material considerations (Section 70(2) Town &

Country Planning Act 1990);

(2) To determine the application in accordance with the development plan unless

other material considerations indicate otherwise. (Section 38(6) of the

Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004);

Where there are policies in the Development Plan which support the proposal and others which do not, it is necessary to assess all the policies and proposals in the Plan and to come to a view as to whether, in the light of the whole Plan, the proposal does or does not accord with it.

(3) In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which

affects a listed building or its setting, to have special regard to the desirability

of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural

or historic interest which it possesses (Section 66 (1) Planning (Listed

Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990); in this case the duty is to have

special regard to the desirability of preserving the setting of West Houses

Farm, a Grade II listed building. The effect of the duty imposed by Section

66(1) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 is to

require decision-makers to give considerable weight and importance to the

desirability of preserving listed buildings and their settings.

(4) The Council must, in exercising its functions, including when considering

whether to grant planning permission, have regard, so far as is consistent with

the proper exercise of those functions, to the purpose of conserving

biodiversity (Section 40(1) Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act

2006)

(5) The application is accompanied by an Environmental Statement (ES). The ES

is a means of drawing together, in a systematic way, an assessment of a

project’s likely significant environmental effects. This is to ensure that the

importance of the predicted effects and the scope for reducing them are

properly understood by the public and the competent authority before it makes

its decision. The Local Planning Authority must not grant planning permission

unless they have first taken into account the environmental information, which

includes the ES, further information and any other information and comments

made by the consultation bodies and any representations from member of the

public about the environmental effects of the development.

(6) The public sector equality duty applies (Section 149 Equality Act 2010)

7. Planning Policy National Planning Policy National Planning Policy Framework (2012) (NPPF) National Planning Policy Guidance (2014, as updated) (PPG) Adopted Development Plan Policy Castle Morpeth District Local Plan (2003) C1 Settlement Boundaries C4 Landscape Corridors C11 Protected Species C12 and C13 Wildlife Corridors

C14 and C15 Trees in the Countryside and Urban Areas C17 Green Belt H1 Housing Land Supply H2 Phasing H15 New Housing Developments H16 Housing in the Open Countryside T5 Public Transport R4 Children’s Play RE4 Water Quality RE5 Surface Water Run-off and Flood Defences RE6 Service Infrastructure RE8 Contaminated Land PC1 Ponteland: Settlement Boundary PH1 Ponteland: Housing Land Supply PT1 A696 Ponteland Bypass PT3 Minor Road Improvements PR2 Public Footpaths and Bridleways Emerging Development Plan Policy Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy Pre-Submission Draft (October 2015) as amended by Proposed Major Modifications (June 2016) and Further Proposed Major Modifications (November 2016) Policy 1 Sustainable Development Policy 2 High Quality Sustainable Design Policy 3 Spatial Distribution Policy 11 Role of Centres Policy 12 Town Centres Policy 15 Housing Provision: Scale and Distribution Policy 18 Planning for Housing Policy 19 Delivering Affordable Housing Policy 28 Principles for the Environment Policy 29 Biodiversity and Geodiversity Policy 30 Landscape Policy 31 Promoting Sustainable Connections Policy 33 Historic Environment and Heritage Assets Policy 35 Water Quality Policy 36 Water supply and sewerage Policy 37 Flooding Policy 38 Sustainable Drainage Systems Policy 40 Unstable and Contaminated Land Policy 41 Promoting Sustainable Connections Policy 41A Effect of Development on the Transport Network Policy 42 Improving Northumberland’s Core Road Network Policy 43 Effects of Development on the Road Network Policy 49 Community Services and Facilities Policy 50 Open Space and Facilities for Sport and Recreation Policy 68 Implementation Policy 69 Planning for Infrastructure Policy 70 Planning Conditions and Obligations Draft South East Ponteland Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) (Nov 2016)

Ponteland Neighbourhood Plan (Pre Submission Draft, Nov 2016) Policy PNP1 Sustainable development Policy PNP2 High Quality and Inclusive Design Policy PNP3 Infrastructure Proposals Policy PNP5 Heritage Assets Policy PNP10 Green Infrastructure Policy PNP11 Landscape Policy PNP13 Biodiversity Policy PNP14 Wildlife Corridors Policy PNP15 Local Green Space Policy PNP18 Economic Development Policy PNP21 Housing Mix Policy PNP22 Community Infrastructure Policy PNP23 Open and Recreation Space Provision Policy PNP24 Protection of Open Space, Sports & Recreational Buildings and Land Policy PNP26 Flood Alleviation Policy PNP27 Flood Risk Policy PNP28 Sustainable Drainage Systems Policy PNP29 Transport and New Developments Policy PNP30 Active Travel Routes Policy PNP32 Public Transport Other Documents/Strategies Northumberland Consolidated Planning Policy Framework (2009) Northumberland County Council Five Year Housing Land Supply 2016 - 2021 Northumberland Strategic Housing Market Assessment (October 2015) (SHMA) Northumberland County Wide Housing Needs Assessment (2012) Northumberland County Council Corporate Plan 2013 - 2017 Northumberland County Council Housing Strategy 2013 - 2018 Northumberland Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) 2016 Housing White Paper “Fixing our broken housing market” (DCLG, Feb 2017) 8. Appraisal 8.1 In terms of Section 70(2) of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 and Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, applying all relevant Development Plan policies, and considering all other policy and guidance (including under the NPPF and PPG) and all other material planning considerations, including representations received, it is considered that the main planning issues raised in relation to the determination of this application are as follows: Principle of the Development

- Development Plan - Green Belt - Very Special Circumstances

Sustainable Development Housing Supply Housing Mix and Affordable Housing Highway Matters Design, Scale and Layout

Landscape Impact Impact on Trees Flooding and Drainage Ecology Heritage Matters Archaeology Newcastle International Airport S106 Planning Obligations

Principle of the Development

8.2 The main issues relating to the principle of the development include the extent to which the proposed development accords with the existing Development Plan for the area (for the purposes of Section 38(6) of the 2004 Act), the extent to which the proposed development accords with the emerging Development Plan (for the purpose of applying paragraph 216 of the NPPF), and the extent to which the proposed development is consistent with Government guidance set out in the NPPF and PPG. 8.3 Section 38(6) (reaffirmed in NPPF paragraph 11) requires applications for planning permission to be determined in accordance with the Development Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. The “saved” policies of the Castle Morpeth Local Plan form the statutory Development Plan in this case. In terms of other policy and guidance, the NPPF and PPG are material considerations. 8.4 The NPPF does not change the statutory priority of the Development Plan as being, fundamentally, the starting point for decision making. Proposed development that accords with an up-to-date Development Plan must be approved, and proposed development that conflicts will be refused, unless material considerations indicate otherwise. However, the NPPF advises at paragraph 215 that in the circumstances of the saved policies of the Local Plan, these are to be afforded due weight according to their consistency with the NPPF. The weight to be attached to relevant saved Local Plan policies will depend upon the degree of consistency with the NPPF. The greater the consistency, the greater the weight that attaches to them. The relevance of this issue is discussed, where appropriate, in the assessment section of the report below. 8.5 Consideration has also been given to policies in the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy (Pre Submission Draft October 2015, Proposed Major Modifications June 2016, and Proposed Further Major Modifications November 2016) which is due to be submitted to Government later this month for independent examination. Regard has also been had to the Pre Submission Draft consultation version of the Ponteland Neighbourhood Plan (Nov 2016) to which limited weight attaches in the determination of this scheme. 8.6 In accordance with paragraph 216 of the NPPF weight may be given to policies in emerging plans depending on: the stage of preparation of the plan, the extent to which emerging policy aligns with the NPPF, and the extent of unresolved objections to the emerging plan. It is therefore considered that weight can be given to the policies in the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy and emerging Ponteland Neighbourhood Plan (PNP) which comprise material considerations in the determination of applications. However, the weight that can be given may vary, depending on how much consultation has been undertaken on the policies, the

nature of the unresolved objections and how consistent the policies are with the NPPF. In addition, the evidence base for the Core Strategy can also be used to inform the assessment of the issues associated with this application. The Development Plan 8.7 The Castle Morpeth Local Plan, in respect of the application site, is clear insofar as the proposed development would be located outside of the Ponteland settlement boundary as defined by saved Local Plan Policies C1 and PC1 and therefore, by implication, would be located in the open countryside. The site is also located within an area identified as Green Belt by Local Plan Policy C17 where new development proposals are generally considered to be inappropriate and, by definition, harmful to the purposes of including land in the Green Belt. Accordingly, the proposal is contrary to these provisions of the development plan. 8.8 Local Plan Policies C1 and PC1 seek to resist development in the open countryside unless it is essential to the needs of agriculture or forestry, or is expressly permitted under other Local Plan policies. Also of relevance is saved Policy H16 of the Local Plan which seeks to prevent new residential development in the open countryside unless for the purposes of agriculture or forestry. When taken as a whole, the proposed development would not accord with Local Plan Policies C1, PC1 and H16. However, the weight that attaches to these policies in the determination of this application requires further exploration given the date of the Local Plan (2003) and their alignment, or otherwise, with guidance contained in the NPPF. 8.9 Whilst the Council has recently considered Policies C1 and PC1 to be largely out-of-date given that the Local Plan was only intended to guide development for the period up to and including 2006, the intention of these policies in terms of recognising and seeking to protect the intrinsic character and beauty of the countryside aligns with the spirit of the NPPF and therefore some weight attaches to them in this respect. However, and more fundamentally, the planning strategy for the growth and development of Ponteland previously (on which the preparation of Policies C1 and PC1 was based) has been to encourage a moderate level of new housing in close proximity to the village centre. This necessitated a modest encroachment into the open countryside and Green Belt to the east of the village while the remainder of the settlement has been constrained by the Green Belt since 1963, preventing expansion to the north and north west, and also to the south and south east where the current application site is located. The mature and well defined boundaries for the settlement, as defined by Local Plan Policies C1 and PC1, have been long established and opportunities for expansion and growth severely limited in recent years. The tight drawing of the settlement boundary for Ponteland along the southern edge of the settlement in particular was a clear sign that any further expansion of the into the open countryside to the south would be considered as being inappropriate and this remains the adopted policy position at this time. 8.10 On this basis, there is an “in principle” objection to the granting of planning permission for residential development on the application site based upon the development plan. However, in order for this policy approach to be fully compliant with the NPPF, and not be seen as a tool for restricting development, there is a need to ensure that there are sufficient sites available within the settlement in order to meet its future development requirements. It is in this context that Policies C1 and PC1 (and also Policy H16) of the Local Plan could now be considered as being out-

of-date. There is currently very limited, if any, scope for the expansion of Ponteland and the consequence of this is that in order for the settlement to maintain its role and function as a large service centre, the current restrictions on development locations in and around the town, and its defined settlement and Green Belt boundaries, need to be reassessed. 8.11The future development strategy for Ponteland is ultimately being determined through the preparation of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy which has now been the subject of several rounds of public consultation in recent years and is due to be submitted to Government later this month for independent examination (anticipated to be held during Summer 2017). This will be considered in more detail below in the context of proposed alterations to existing Green Belt (and therefore settlement) boundaries. Green Belt 8.12 The application site is currently located within the North Tyneside Green Belt as was originally designated in 1963. The emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy which, as noted above, is close to the point of submission to Government for independent examination, proposes the removal of the whole of the current application site from the Green Belt (and also the land immediately north and west) to allow for a proportionate level of growth in order to meet the housing, educational and leisure needs of Ponteland during the Plan period i.e. up to 2031. It is important to recognise the emerging policy position at the outset of considerations relating to the Green Belt and this will be considered in more detail below as a factor weighing in favour of the proposal. However, it is also important to acknowledge that until the Core Strategy passes examination in public (scheduled to be Summer 2017), and is adopted by the Council (currently anticipated to be December 2017), the weight which can be attached to the emerging policy position is limited and the site must, for the purposes of decision making, still be considered as being in the Green Belt. 8.13 Local Plan Policy C17 seeks to resist the development of new buildings in the Green Belt other than for the purposes expressly allowed by the policy which does not include new market housing. Policy C17 is broadly consistent with the NPPF in terms of its treatment of built development in the Green Belt and, as such, there is a further “in principle” objection to the application in this respect. However, it is important to note that there are variations in the language used in the wording of Local Plan Policy C17 when compared to current Green Belt guidance set out in the NPPF. 8.14 Importantly, and fundamentally, Local Plan Policy C17 makes no provision for assessing whether there are very special circumstances that would outweigh potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm identified (NPPF paras 87 and 88). In this regard, the NPPF is considered to provide the most up-to-date Green Belt policy position whereby in cases where very special circumstances can be demonstrated by an applicant to outweigh harm to the Green Belt and any other identified harm, development which may otherwise be considered to be inappropriate may be permissible. 8.15 On this basis, reduced weight attaches to Local Plan Policy C17 in the determination of the application. Instead, the proposal falls squarely to be considered in the context of NPPF Part 9 ‘Protecting Green Belt Land’.

8.16 Paragraph 80 of the NPPF states that the Green Belt serves five purposes:

● to check the unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas; ● to prevent neighbouring towns merging into one another; ● to assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment; ● to preserve the setting and special character of historic towns; and ● to assist in urban regeneration, by encouraging the recycling of derelict

and other urban land. 8.17 Ponteland is one of a small number of settlements that have been identified in the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy as requiring a change to current Green Belt boundaries. The Council considers that there is an evidenced need to provide additional housing and employment land over and above what could reasonably be accommodated within the current settlement boundary for Ponteland, which is tightly drawn around the built-up part of the settlement, with no safeguarded land included to meet future development requirements. In order to ensure delivery of the sustainable development needs and requirements of Ponteland, the emerging Core Strategy identifies a need to provide a mix of additional housing and employment opportunities which, given the extremely limited availability of land within the settlement boundary as currently defined in the Castle Morpeth Local Plan, provides the ‘exceptional circumstances’ required by paragraph 83 of the NPPF for an alteration of the existing Green Belt boundary. 8.18 In preparation of the emerging Core Strategy, a Green Belt review methodology was prepared and used to assess identified land parcel areas and how they perform against the five Green Belt purposes set out in NPPF paragraph 80. The Green Belt assessment fed into the Strategic Land Review (SLR) which forms part of the evidence base and considered the amount of land required to deliver the proposed housing and employment requirements; identified and mapped relevant constraints; defined sectors and options for appropriate locations for future development; and refined options and identified a preferred location for changes to the Green Belt boundary, including the need for the identification of safeguarded land. The use of this methodology has ensured consistency in approach to the identification of locations to be removed from the Green Belt to allow for sustainable future growth. 8.19 Green Belt alterations are proposed in the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy immediately east of Darras Hall (Callerton Lane) and also south east of the built up area of the existing settlement which includes this application site together with the land immediately north and west which includes the land on which the existing Ponteland Middle and High Schools, and Ponteland Leisure Centre, are located. These proposed Green Belt releases, which also include safeguarded land for development beyond the Plan period i.e. beyond 2031, would provide sufficient land, together with existing committed sites elsewhere within the settlement, to satisfy the objectively assessed housing need (OAN) for Ponteland as well as making land readily available for new school and leisure facilities. 8.20 It is important to note in this context that a further Green Belt alteration is proposed north of Ponteland and Darras Hall to facilitate delivery of a new garden settlement. This is the subject of a separate application due to be considered on this Strategic Planning Committee agenda (ref: 16/04672/OUTES) and, in the context of plan preparation, is seen as a distinct additional element to the housing and economic development needs identified in the emerging Core Strategy. It would deliver housing over and above objectively assessed need (OAN) and would also

seek to deliver strategic Government objectives in respect of accelerated housing and economic growth that can only be provided through new garden settlement proposals. The scheme would also provide additional flexibility within the Plan to complement the strategy of housing delivery for the Central Delivery Area of Northumberland and, moreover, would add a complementary offer to the proposed allocations at Ponteland rather than seeking to compete against them. 8.21 Notwithstanding the above, paragraph 87 of the NPPF advises that “as with previous Green Belt policy, inappropriate development is, by definition, harmful to the Green Belt and should not be approved except in very special circumstances.” 8.22 Paragraph 88 of the NPPF goes on to state that “when considering any planning application, Local Planning Authorities should ensure that substantial weight is given to any harm to the Green Belt. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations.” 8.23 NPPF paragraphs 89 and 90 set out the range of uses considered as not being inappropriate in the Green Belt. When paragraphs 87 - 90 of the NPPF are read together, it is evident that the proposed development in this case would constitute inappropriate development in the Green Belt which, by definition, is harmful. Moreover, given that the essential characteristics of Green Belts are their openness and their permanence, there is no denying that as a result of the proposed development there would be a very marked loss of openness given that existing open agricultural land would be replaced by a large housing development compromising of up to 400 houses with associated infrastructure provision. Given the significant loss of openness, and the permanence of that loss, the test in this case is to consider whether this harm would be clearly outweighed by other considerations so as to amount to very special circumstances necessary to justify inappropriate development in the Green Belt. Very Special Circumstances 8.24 Paragraph 88 of the NPPF makes clear that very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. It is clear that all harm (both to the Green Belt and any other harm identified) should be included and weighed in the balance when deciding whether very special circumstances exist in the determination of an application. This section considers whether very special circumstances exist and the overall balance is considered in the conclusions at the end of this report. 8.25 The presence of very special circumstances will depend on the weight of each of the factors put forward and the degree of weight to be afforded to each, both individually and in combination. The first part of that process is to determine whether any individual factor, taken independently, would outweigh the overall harm to the Green Belt. The second part is to determine whether some or all of the factors in combination would outweigh the harm. There is no formula or categoric process for deciding whether any particular factor in its own right, or any combination of factors, would amount to the very special circumstances necessary to justify allowing inappropriate development in the Green Belt. The case must therefore be decided in terms of the overall planning balance, qualitatively rather than quantitatively, and

also in line with the economic, social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development. 8.26 There are a number of substantial benefits forming part of the application proposals which need to be carefully weighed in the overall planning balance to establish whether, individually or cumulatively, they would amount to the very special circumstances required to substantially outweigh the harm. The applicant’s Planning Statement sets out the overarching very special circumstances case of which the following are considered to be the key pillars:

Emerging policy support in the Draft Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy for removal of the application site from the Green Belt;

Significant financial contributions towards delivery of the much needed

new education and leisure campus immediately north west of the site,

including a more efficient use of land and resulting in enhanced sports

provision and equipment as a result of this gap funding; and

Employment opportunities both through the construction process and

longer-term.

8.27 In line with the NPPF objective of achieving sustainable development, these very special circumstances would deliver significant social, economic and environmental benefits to Ponteland and the wider area. 8.28 Each will now be considered in turn and in greater detail below. Emerging Policy Support 8.29 As already explained earlier in the report, the application site forms part of a wider triangle of land (incorporating land immediately to the north and west) which is proposed to be released from the Green Belt in the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy to assist in accommodating the growth requirements of Ponteland over the duration of the Plan period i.e. up to and including 2031, with an area of safeguarded land west of the application site also proposed for development beyond the Plan period. Through the Strategic Land Review (SLR) and the Northumberland Green Belt Assessment 2015, undertaken as part of the preparation of the emerging Core Strategy evidence base, this parcel of land has been identified as providing a ‘medium contribution’ to the five purposes of Green Belt. Key to this analysis is the fact that the site lies immediately adjacent to existing built development to the north, north west and east and is also firmly contained to the south by Rotary Way which would provide a hard edge to the proposed Green Belt boundary alteration. This means that development on this site would not increase the risk of mergence between Ponteland and Newcastle as the area is already partially developed and the proposal would not conflict with this specific Green Belt purpose. 8.30 In October 2015, the Council consulted members of the public and stakeholders on a draft Supplementary Planning Document (SPD) for the South East of Ponteland to further inform the proposed Green Belt alteration and set an overarching framework for its future development and delivery. The glossary of the NPPF defines SPD’s as “documents which add further detail to the policies in the Local Plan” and the draft South East Ponteland SPD drew substantial comment through consultation

and prompted subsequent revisions to the document. These were the subject of a further consultation exercise during November and December 2016. 8.31 The draft SPD has been prepared alongside the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy and is seen as being essential in delivering the key objectives of the Plan, not least in terms of facilitating sustainable development and sustaining the vitality of the Ponteland community in line with emerging Core Strategy Policy 3. Main towns such as Ponteland are identified in Policy 3 as being key hubs for housing, employment, education, healthcare, retail, transport and tourism and are therefore the main focus for development to underpin their social, economic, environmental and cultural regeneration. The draft SPD has a key role to play in achieving these objectives and establishes some key principles for development of the South East Ponteland area including the delivery of:

Improved leisure and education facilities;

A mix of types of housing to meet local housing needs and support

sustainable communities;

New build development that protects the most sensitive parts of the site from

development and minimises impact of the development on the wider Green

Belt and key views;

Improved accessibility to education provision, reducing congestion in the

town;

Improved pedestrian and cycling links to education and leisure provision;

Strategic open space/green wedge;

An appropriate mix and location of development that addresses flood risk

issues; and

Safeguarded land for future development beyond the Plan period.

8.32 The weight to be attached to the emerging strategic policy support for this proposal through the draft Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy and draft South East Ponteland SPD, as already acknowledged above, is considered to be limited at this stage. However, it does form part a material consideration that weighs positively in the overall planning balance and associated very special circumstances case, particularly as the proposed development would align entirely with emerging strategic policy objectives. 8.33 An issue to consider in the context of emerging policy support is that of prematurity and whether it would be premature to determine the application in advance of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy being independently examined (anticipated to be held during Summer 2017), and ultimately adopted by the Council (expected December 2017) at which point the current Green Belt designation the site would fall away. This issue has been raised by a number of objectors to the scheme. 8.34 Officers have considered whether it should await the outcome of the Plan process before determining this application positively but has decided that there is no good reason to refuse the application on prematurity grounds. Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) recognises that “refusal of planning permission on grounds of prematurity will seldom be justified where a draft Local Plan has yet to be submitted for examination” and states that, in cases where prematurity may be justifiable as a refusal reason, the circumstances are likely, but not exclusively, to be limited to

situations where “the development proposed is so substantial, or its cumulative effect would be so significant, that to grant permission would undermine the plan-making process by predetermining decisions about the scale, location or phasing of new development that are central to an emerging Local Plan; and the emerging plan is at an advanced stage but is not yet formally part of the development plan for the area”. 8.35 In this case, should Members be minded to approve the application, Officers have concluded that there would be no adverse impacts of granting planning permission for the development at this stage and in advance of examination of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy. Key Education and Leisure Provision 8.36 A pivotal argument in the consideration of this planning application is that the proposed development would be fundamental in the delivery of a new education and leisure campus for Ponteland on land immediately to the north west of the site. As already explained earlier in the report, this related development proposal is also the subject of a planning application being considered at this meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee (ref: 16/04576/CCD) 8.37 This application for housing development has been brought forward together, in a cumulative and masterplanned way as envisaged in the draft South East Ponteland SPD, with the adjacent site for the proposed new education and leisure campus. Consistently, this application may be considered with regard to the adjacent site in terms of what are considered to be substantial, cumulative sustainability objectives that would be capable of being delivered through the development of these sites in combination with each other. 8.38 The proposed housing scheme, through a significant financial contribution secured through a Section 106 planning obligation, would help to facilitate delivery of the new education and leisure campus which is a fundamental need in advance of adoption of the emerging Core Strategy due to the poor state of repair of the existing facilities. Emerging Core Strategy Policy 3 directly relates to this in looking at ‘spatial distribution’ and this proposal falls directly in line with the objective of the policy in that it would take advantage of the inter-related nature of the mixed-use development that is planned to come forward in the South East Ponteland SPD area. The case covers the following issues:

The need for new school facilities;

The need for new leisure facilities including playing pitches;

Cross subsidy from housing to education and leisure;

Land linkages between the respective sites;

Enhancement of education/leisure facilities; and

Environmental benefits of combined development proposals.

8.39 Since 2013, the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy has consistently proposed to release the triangle of land south east of Ponteland from the Green Belt to allow for the comprehensive planning of improved community facilities and homes to meet local need. The draft South East Ponteland SPD (being introduced alongside the emerging Core Strategy) includes a masterplan to show how a range of education, leisure and housing needs can be met on the site.

8.40 The chosen scheme for replacing Ponteland’s outdated High School (and the Richard Coates Middle School) is to provide a combined campus with a new primary school, secondary school, library and replacement leisure centre on the site of the existing leisure centre which itself is outdated. This is the most efficient use of the land available but it does necessitate replacing the leisure centre at the same time as the new school and also rationalising playing pitch provision. The project therefore is bigger and more diverse than one which would normally be funded from a Central Government source (such as the Department for Education) and as such it requires gap funding which the proposed housing development can provide.

8.41 There are clear physical linkages between the application site and the proposed school and leisure redevelopment to the north west. Some of the sports facilities would be located on land on the same side of the Fairney Burn as the housing scheme and construction of these facilities would be easier if access were taken from the east off the A696 through this application site. The opportunity to maximise pedestrian movements between the housing and the school/leisure campus would also be achieved by new routes across the Fairney Burn. This would also be funded from the proposed housing development. The opportunity to reduce the risk of flooding from the Fairney Burn would also assist in the delivery of the education and leisure site.

8.42 Paragraph 72 of the NPPF sets out the Government’s strong support for planning new schools, advising that the Government attaches great importance to ensuring that a sufficient choice of school places is available to meet the needs of existing and new communities. It makes clear that Local Planning Authorities should take a proactive, positive and collaborative approach to meeting this requirement and to development proposals that would widen choice in education. They should give great weight to the need to create, expand or alter schools and work with schools promoters to identify and resolve key planning issues before applications are submitted. NPPF paragraph 73 meanwhile sets out the Governments strong support for the provision of sport and recreation facilities, recognising that access to high quality open spaces and opportunities for sport and recreation can make an important contribution to the health and well-being of communities.

8.43 The approach adopted in this particular case aligns entirely with these key Government objectives as set out in paragraphs 72 and 73 of the Framework. Whilst the application for the development of the education and leisure campus has been presented as a separate application, there is an important strategic development plan context in relation to both of these applications and, as such, is a material consideration when assessing this application both in terms of the contribution it would make to educational improvements and to the opportunity to enhance sport and recreation facilities. It is Officer opinion that the significant financial contribution towards delivery of the new education and leisure campus is a factor weighing very heavily in favour of the application and as such should be given great weight in the overall planning balance and associated very special circumstances case. Moreover, the amount being sought from the applicant towards delivery of the new education and leisure campus is considered to be necessary and proportionate to the scale of development being proposed, and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind, thus complying with the tests set out in Section 122(2) of the CIL Regulations.

Economic Impacts 8.44 A positive and interventionist approach is being taken by the Council to increase job creation and support sustainable economic growth in the County over

the Plan period. In line with the Northumberland Economic Strategy, the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy seeks to deliver 10,000 new jobs by 2031 in order to reduce unemployment as well as attract and retain the key working age demographic. This in turn aligns firmly with the regional aspiration of creating 100,000 more and better jobs across the North East Local Enterprise Partnership (NELEP) area by 2024 as identified in the Strategic Economic Plan (SEP), and would also support current discussions on a North of Tyne devolution deal in which it is expected that an ambitious target of creating 50,000 jobs by 2024 or sooner will be committed to. 8.45 The SEP identifies the connection between the requirement for a more highly skilled workforce and demand for higher quality housing. Ensuring that Northumberland provides an appropriate mix of high quality housing, including affordable housing, to support economic growth is one of the Place Theme Priorities identified in the Northumberland Economic Strategy 2015 - 2020. 8.46Located within the Central Delivery Area and in close proximity to Newcastle upon Tyne and key infrastructure connections such as Newcastle International Airport, the A1, A696, and the Metro, the proposed development would help to support additional economic growth in the area through the provision of high quality housing in a desirable location and in an area of known high demand. Moreover, jobs would be created, both directly and indirectly, over the lifetime of the construction phase which is expected to be between 6 to 8 years. 8.47 Overall it is considered that the proposed development would support the strategic objective of delivering a thriving and competitive economy through the provision of high quality location housing in a desirable location and the creation of employment opportunities through the duration of the construction phase. This factor, whilst not a very special circumstance in its own right, is considered to weigh positively in favour of the scheme, as a benefit, in combination with other material considerations. Conclusion on the Principle of Development

8.48 The proposal draws support from the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy insofar as the site and the land immediately to the north and west forms part of a proposed Green Belt alteration to cater for the future housing, education and leisure needs of the Ponteland community. However, only limited weight can be given to the emerging policy position at this stage and until such time that the Core Strategy has been independently examined and adopted by the Council. 8.49 The application therefore falls to be considered primarily in the context of the existing Development Plan and other material considerations insofar as they are relevant to the determination of the scheme, including the NPPF. 8.50 As set out at Section 38(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act, if regard is to be had to the Development Plan in determining the application, such a determination must be made in accordance with the Plan unless material considerations indicate otherwise. In this case the Development Plan position is clear. The site is located in the open countryside and Green Belt, notwithstanding its proposed deletion from the Green Belt in the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy, and as such there is an “in principle” objection to the scheme when

considered against Policies C1, C17, PC1 and H16 of the Local Plan. As inappropriate development, which is by definition harmful to the Green Belt, the proposed development should not be approved except in very special circumstances. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm identified, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. (NPPF paras 87 and 88) 8.51 The above sections deal with those matters which are considered to weigh strongly in favour of granting planning permission for this development. However, whether these clearly outweigh harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other identified harm, will be returned to at the end of the report once all other potential elements of harm have been identified and taken into account. Sustainable Development 8.52 Paragraph 14 of the NPPF provides definitive guidance on how planning applications should be determined in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable development by stating:

“At the heart of the NPPF is a presumption in favour of sustainable development which should be seen as a golden thread running through both plan-making and decision-taking. For decision-taking this means: - Approving development proposals that accord with the development plan

without delay;

- Where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-

date, granting permission unless any adverse impacts of doing so would

significantly and demonstrably outweigh the benefits when assessed against

the policies in the Framework taken as a whole, or specific policies in the

Framework indicate that development should be restricted 9.”

8.53 The effect that footnote 9 has on NPPF paragraph 14 whereby, should a proposed development be shown to be sustainable, the requirement to grant permission in cases where the development plan is absent, silent or relevant policies are out-of-date does not apply if specific policies in the Framework indicate that development should be restricted. Footnote 9 makes clear that this includes, amongst other things, land designated as Green Belt. 8.54 Paragraph 6 of the NPPF advises that the policies set out in paragraphs 18 to 219 of the document, taken as a whole, constitute the Government’s view of what sustainable development in England means in practice for the planning system. 8.55 Paragraph 7 of the NPPF provides the key starting point against which the sustainability of a development proposal should be assessed. This identifies three dimensions to sustainable development which are set out as follows:

an economic role - contributing to building a strong, responsive and

competitive economy, by ensuring that sufficient land of the right type is

available in the right places and at the right time to support growth and

innovation; and by identifying and coordinating development requirements,

including the provision of infrastructure;

a social role - supporting strong, vibrant and healthy communities, by

providing the supply of housing required to meet the needs of present and

future generations; and by creating a high quality built environment, with

accessible local services that reflect the community’s needs and support its

health, social and cultural well-being; and

an environmental role - contributing to protecting and enhancing our natural,

built and historic environment; and, as part of this, helping to improve

biodiversity, use natural resources prudently, minimise waste and pollution,

and mitigate and adapt to climate change including moving to a low carbon

economy.

8.56 Paragraph 8 of the NPPF goes on to advise how the three roles of sustainable development are mutually dependent and should not be undertaken in isolation:

“Economic growth can secure higher social and environmental standards, and well-designed buildings and places can improve the lives of people and communities. Therefore, to achieve sustainable development, economic, social and environmental gains should be sought jointly and simultaneously through the planning system. The planning system should play an active role in guiding development to sustainable solutions.”

8.57 The definition of sustainable development in the NPPF therefore goes beyond a simple assessment of the sustainability of a proposal. Instead, development proposals must be considered in the context of each of their economic, social and environmental roles. These roles should not be undertaken in isolation, because they are mutually dependent. Economic growth can secure higher social and environmental standard, and well-designed buildings and places can improve the lives of people and communities. 8.58 The sections below deal in detail with all matters of a technical nature and largely determine whether the proposal would achieve sustainable development. By way of overview however, the proposed residential development would deliver:

Economic Benefits - The development would create new employment opportunities with on-site construction supporting 120 jobs which would contribute towards Northumberland’s strategy for growth in employment. Ponteland has been identified as a town where entrepreneurial business people would settle and create employment and the proposed high quality housing development would lend support to key infrastructure in the form of education and leisure facilities which would support further job creation.

Social Benefits - The development would provide approximately 400 new homes and would support the provision of affordable housing. It would also support the renewal of education and leisure facilities for Ponteland. It would help rebalance the town’s population which is important for education provision and would also to support and sustain the town centre shops and facilities. New housing would also provide a healthy place to live with accessible local services and facilities.

Environmental Benefits - The development would create wildlife corridors, green infrastructure, sustainable urban drainage system, and the provision of homes with a good sustainability rating. The renewal of education and leisure

facilities and the proximity of the housing to the new education and leisure campus would also reduce the amount of traffic movements in the local area.

Housing Supply

8.59 Paragraph 47 of the NPPF seeks to boost significantly the supply of housing with NPPF paragraph 49 makes clear that housing applications should be considered in the context of the presumption in favour of sustainable. Recent Government announcements and publications, including the recently issued Housing White Paper (Feb 2017), have further emphasised the need to deliver housing at an accelerated rate and this is a material consideration in the determination of this application. 8.60 Policy 3 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy defines Ponteland as a 'Main Town' and as such it is a main focus for development to underpin social, economic, environmental and cultural regeneration. The policy makes clear that the majority of housing development should be focused in Main Towns and Service Centres. 8.61 For the County as a whole, the emerging Core Strategy proposes to create 10,000 additional jobs up to and including 2031.To facilitate this, and to meet identified housing need, the development of at least 24,320 new homes is evidenced as being required to support the proposed level of job creation. The proposed housing number is based on consideration of a number of population and economic growth scenarios and represents a positive policy intervention to address an existing imbalance in the County's working age population. 8.62 Emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy Policy 15 sets out the housing requirement for the Central Delivery Area (within which Ponteland sits) as 5,940 dwellings over the Plan period 2011 - 31 equating to 297 dwellings per annum. The policy identifies a requirement for 900 dwellings over the Plan period in the Ponteland area specifically. 8.63 The most recent Five Year Supply of Deliverable Sites annual monitoring report, published in December 2016, identifies a supply of housing currently equivalent to 8.2 years in the Central Delivery Area. This means that there is no shortfall in the five year supply of deliverable housing land which could form a material consideration in determining this application. Moreover, policies relating to the supply of housing within the Castle Morpeth Local Plan can be given due weight in determining the application but only insofar as they are consistent with the NPPF. 8.64 The policies for the supply of housing set out in the Castle Morpeth Local Plan (Policies H1 and PH1) only extended as far as the Plan period which was up until 2006. The indicative housing figures set out in the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy are therefore the best point of reference for establishing the housing requirement for the Ponteland area for the current Plan period which, as set out above, sets a target of 900 dwellings up to and including 2031. This is the minimum housing number required to support the growth of the County and is not a maximum number or a ceiling that would otherwise seek to cap development. It is not the intention to resist schemes solely on oversupply grounds but instead recognise that it enables the Local Planning Authority to be more selective over which sites it does release to ensure that the most sustainable and appropriate sites are brought forward for development.

8.65 As already explained, Green Belt alterations are proposed in the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy to cater for the objectively assessed housing needs of the settlement. This includes the land subject of this current application. Land is also safeguarded for development beyond the Plan period i.e. after 2031, immediately west of the application site. 8.66 The site is considered to be located in a sustainable location due to its position in relation to the town centre of Ponteland and the scale of development being proposed would align with the strategic objectives of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy in terms of housing delivery. The proposal would make a significant and meaningful contribution to the objectively assessed housing requirements of Ponteland over the plan period and on a site where residential development is envisaged in the emerging Plan. Whether the site is appropriate to be developed in other respects is considered in the following sections. Housing Mix and Affordable Housing 8.67 In order to widen the choice of high quality homes and widen opportunities for home ownership, Paragraph 50 of the NPPF encourages the provision of affordable housing based on evidenced need appropriate both in tenure and range. The Council’s Corporate Plan and Housing Strategy also both identify the delivery of affordable housing as a key strategic priority with both making clear that the mix and tenure of affordable homes on development sites should reflect the Council’s current housing needs evidence base. 8.68 The stage of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy is such that its policies can be afforded weight in the decision making process having regard to the criteria set out in paragraph 216 of the NPPF. Moreover, significant weight can be given to the evidence base underpinning the Plan and on which its preparation has been based. This includes the 2015 Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) 8.69 Policy 19 of the emerging Core Strategy sets a plan target for 30% of new homes across Northumberland to be affordable. The 2015 SHMA identifies the affordable housing need requirement over a five year period. Given the number of affordable housing units forecast to be delivered over the next five year period (as evidenced in the Council’s Five Year Supply of Deliverable Sites 2016 - 2021 report published in December 2016), Policy 19 requires all new proposals for housing to deliver 15% of homes as affordable units (subject to local need and viability). If there is evidence of local need to support a higher proportion of affordable homes, the policy is flexible to require in excess of the 15% required at the County level. 8.70 The emerging Core Strategy states that an affordable housing contribution will be expected on all proposals of more than ten units and which have a combined floorspace of more 1000sqm. In line with emerging Policy 19 therefore, 15% affordable housing provision in this particular case would equate to 60 affordable units (based on a development of 400 dwellings). In light of the level of existing and planned affordable rented and discount market value (DMV) housing units likely to be delivered in Ponteland in the short term however, particularly from schemes including the former Ponteland Library and former Northumbria Police HQ sites, and the proposed Dissington Garden Village (should Members be minded to approve that particular application), the Council’s Affordable Housing Team has suggested on this occasion that the affordable housing would be better being provided off-site and in

the medium term to ensure a continued supply of affordable housing opportunities. At the time of writing the report it is envisaged that the affordable housing would be provided on the existing Richard Coates Middle School site once this becomes available for redevelopment. This has been accepted by the Affordable Housing Team as a suitable medium term solution to affordable housing provision in the settlement and, in terms of location, is also considered preferable when compared to this application site given its more central location within the town and its very close proximity to local services and facilities. 8.71 The principle of accepting a financial contribution towards off-site affordable housing provision in lieu of on-site provision is accepted by Policy 19 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy and is also supported by the NPPF which states that, in order to deliver a wide choice of high quality homes, off-site affordable housing provision or a financial contribution towards it can be accepted where this can be robustly justified. 8.72 The need for off-site delivery of affordable housing needs to be considered within the context of other delivery sites and current social housing stock already provided in Ponteland. The level of existing stock is significant and together with the new stock proposed through existing planning permissions, and other proposed developments in the area, it would be more than adequate to cope with turnover of tenancies within the local area and also to enable significant growth in the social housing and intermediate housing offer. 8.73 The level of off-site affordable housing contribution negotiated with the applicant would equate to the provision of 15% affordable housing on-site and, as explained above, the contribution would be used to provide affordable homes on an alternative site(s) in Ponteland in the medium term. This would be secured through the Section 106 legal agreement and would ensure compliance with the NPPF and Policy 19 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy in this respect. 8.74 In relation to the proposed illustrative mix of housing on the application site itself, at present this is proposed to comprise of a mix of three, four and five bedroomed properties comprising of detached and semi-detached units. This mix is illustrative at this stage, however it shows the intention of the applicant to provide a reasonable mix of different sized properties across a development of this scale. An appropriate mix and size of properties would be ensured at the reserved matters stage. Highway Matters 8.75 NPPF Part 4, in the general spirit of securing the delivery of sustainable forms of development, seeks to promote sustainable transport with paragraph 32 in particular stating that all development proposals that would generate significant amounts of movement should be supported by a Transport Statement or a Transport Assessment (TA). Plans and decisions should take account of whether:

The opportunities for sustainable transport modes have been taken up

depending on the nature and location of the site, to reduce the need for

major transport infrastructure;

Safe and suitable access to the site can be achieved for all people; and

Improvements can be undertaken within the transport network that cost

effectively limits the significant impacts of the development. Development

should only be prevented or refused on transport grounds where the

residual cumulative impacts of development are severe.

8.76 Planning Practice Guidance (PPG) Chapter 42 highlights the importance of Travel Plans, Transport Assessments and Transport Statements in decision taking. It advises that Travel Plans should be used to promote sustainable forms of transport. 8.77 The applicant has commissioned S.A.J Consultants Ltd to assess the transport impacts of the proposed development. Because of the close inter-relationship with the proposals for the new school and leisure campus immediately north west of the application site, the Transport Assessment (TA) undertaken has considered both schemes together. It has been formed on the basis of the two development sites being integrated to create a sustainable development that minimises the impacts on the surrounding local road network and also the wider strategic road network.

8.78 The submitted TA (read in conjunction with the Travel Plan) demonstrates:

How the proposed residential development and the proposed education and leisure campus could be integrated to create a sustainable development;

How the proposed sites could be integrated with existing public transport, footways and cycle routes;

How the development proposals could take up the opportunities to promote sustainable modes of travel and minimise vehicular trip generation by implementing travel awareness measures as a key travel plan initiative; and

The residual cumulative impacts associated with the development traffic would not be severe, both operationally and in terms of road safety.

8.79 The TA takes into account the adjacent leisure and educational proposals and integration of the proposed residential site. The TA considers the impact of the proposed development, both individually and cumulatively, and the applicant scoped the requirements for the assessment with the Council and Highways England in advance of it being carried out.

8.80 From a Northumberland perspective the TA covers a study area which includes:

- The A696/Rotary Way/Garden Centre Roundabout (J1) - The A696/ Callerton Lane Signal Controlled Junction (J2) - The A696/ North Road Mini Roundabout (J3) - The Callerton Lane/ Middle Drive Roundabout (J4) - The Rotary Way/ Callerton Lane Roundabout (J5) - The proposed site access junctions.

8.81 Overall the Transport Assessment (Dec 2016) and an Addendum Sensitivity Assessment on the Local Road Network (February 2017) have been reviewed and it is considered that the information is satisfactory and that the impact of the proposed development would not be considered as being severe in highway terms.

8.82 Highway England have also been consulted on this application as a statutory consultee on matters relating to the strategic road network.

Proposed Residential Development

8.83 The proposed development would create two access points on Ponteland Road and Rotary Way which are discussed in more detail in the Highway works section below. The internal layout of the site would also maximise the opportunities for walking, cycling and access to public transport which is welcomed.

8.84 Trip rates in the TA have been aligned to the emerging Core Strategy and predicted vehicular trip generation during the AM and PM peak hours for the proposed development are set out in the submitted report. In addition, alternative trip rates requested by Highway England for the Strategic Road Network assessment have been applied within the study area for the local road network. The approach to trip distribution has been based on the 2011 Census and the Highway Authority are satisfied with the approach taken.

8.85 Assessment years (2016 and 2026), growth factors within the AM and PM peak, and the worst case scenario of 2026 Committed and Proposed Residential Development traffic is presented. In terms of performance of the junctions in the worst case scenario i.e. 2026 Committed and Proposed Residential Development traffic:

The A696/Rotary Way/Garden Centre Roundabout (J1) - Junction 1 would operate within capacity.

The A696/ Callerton Lane Signal Controlled Junction (J2) and A696/ North Road Mini Roundabout (J3)

8.86 The TA concludes that Junctions 2 and 3 as identified above would operate above capacity with or without development. Overall, combining Junctions 2 and 3 there would be an increase of around 55 vehicle movements in the AM peak and 48 movements in PM peak period. Whilst there would be an increase in the number of vehicle movements however, this is not considered likely to result in severe impacts.

The Callerton Lane/ Middle Drive Roundabout (J4) - Junction 4 performance would not be materially compromised as a result of proposed development.

The Rotary Way/ Callerton Lane Roundabout (J5) - Junction 5 would operate within capacity.

The proposed site access junctions - The site accesses from both Rotary Way and Cheviot View/A696 would operate within capacity.

Education/ Leisure Facilities

8.87 The proposed redevelopment of the adjacent site to the north west with a new education and leisure campus is considered within the TA. Education reform to the existing school provision in Ponteland with a change from a three-tier system to a two-tier system is also assessed. The assessment takes into account the remaining Ponteland Middle School as part of a two-tier Education Authority and assumes that the replacement and improvement of the leisure centre and the closure of the fire station would result in no significant net change. The approach to the TA is considered reasonable in these respects.

8.88 The change in traffic patterns associated with the ‘future schools development’ scenario is set out in the TA and the methodology used is considered to be a logical

and reasonable approach by the Council. To establish baseline conditions for each school, existing postcode data is used to establish locations and walking distances, calibrate existing travel mode share to inform mode split against distance, estimate the existing number of home-school-home trips and home-school-work trips and their associated traffic distribution. The future schools development scenario takes into account the future postcode area zones to establish locations and distances to schools, predicts future travel mode to establish the mode split and combines future home-school-home trips and home- school-work trips. The methodology establishes traffic patterns associated with the existing and future school provision.

8.89 The proposed new education facility would include two access points along Callerton Lane and, whilst indicative formats have been included in Appendices M and N of the TA, the detail would be dealt with as part of the redevelopment of the adjacent site. Changes to the schools have been considered in the Transport Assessment as the ‘Future Schools Development Scenario’. The assumptions in this scenario and detailed assessment methodology have been agreed with Council.

8.90 The impact of the proposed redevelopment of the education/leisure site is considered by the Highway Authority as part of application ref: 16/04576/CCD also forming part of this Strategic Planning Committee agenda.

Residential/ Education Development (Cumulative Impact)

8.91 The proposed 400 residential dwellings would generate approximately 112 primary and secondary school pupils. The pupils are likely to displace pupils from other Local Authority areas. A cumulative assessment has been undertaken due to the close proximity of the residential and educational sites and interaction between the uses. In terms of performance of the junctions in the worst case scenario 2026 Committed and Proposed Campus and Residential AM peak is assessed and set out. Results for the educational/ leisure campus and residential development are as follows:

The A696/Rotary Way/Garden Centre Roundabout (J1) - Junction 1 would operate within capacity .

The A696/ Callerton Lane Signal Controlled Junction (J2) and A696/ North Road Mini Roundabout (J3)

8.92 The Transport Assessment concludes that Junctions 2 and 3 as identified above would operate above capacity with or without development. The assessment has identified physical improvements to the town centre junctions which are acceptable. These improvements would include:

Stage 1 - Modifications to the existing mini roundabout layout to increase entry widths and make an efficient use of space. Renew the MOVA unit to improve signal optimisation.

Stage 2 - Widen the Callerton Lane arm at the signal controlled junction to create a two-lane approach and revise signal phasing.

8.93 Whilst there would be an increase in vehicle movements this is not considered to be severe and suitable mitigation is proposed that would be secured through S106 planning obligations should Members be minded to approve the application.

8.94 Junction 4 (Callerton Lane/Middle Drive Roundabout) would operate over capacity in the AM peak periods. The Middle Lane and Callerton Lane South arms are mainly affected. The assessments suggest a number of factors that could affect the traffic including school bus provision, travel plans, operation of new accesses and use of the pedestrian crossing facilities for example. Monitoring of the situation is one option and mitigation is proposed in the 2017 assessment which would involve installing a hard central island, re-lining and a yellow box junction. The assessment concludes that mitigation measures would improve the performance of the junction and accommodate the impacts of the campus should this prove necessary. Taking into account the assessments and on site observations it is clear that the junction does not operate effectively for only a small portion of the day. A reasonable way forward would be to agree monitoring details as part of the development of the education/ leisure site and wider works to Callerton Lane. Should issues arise then that developer would have to construct works to the junction.

The Rotary Way/Callerton Lane Roundabout (J5) - Junction 5 would operate within capacity.

Junction A and B - Site access junctions - The site accesses on both Rotary Way and Cheviot View would operate within capacity.

Junction C and D - Site access junctions for the education and leisure campus would operate within capacity.

Strategic Road Network

8.95 Consultation with Highways England has previously taken place in respect of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy site allocations (of which the application site is one) and therefore it is recognised that the application site has been considered as part of the Highways England Infrastructure Study (May 2016). The outcomes of the study identified measures that would need to be included in the Plan with regards the Strategic Road Network (SRN) to ensure that the SRN can support the identified spatial aspirations of Northumberland. 8.96 Highways England have subsequently commented on the specific application proposal and seek to understand the impact of the proposals on the Strategic Road Network in more detail. At grade junctions (A696) in the vicinity of Newcastle International Airport and also at the A1/A696/B6918 junction fall within the scope of Highways England assessment. Revised information has been submitted from the applicant to address points made by Highways England and at the time of writing the report a further response from Highways England is awaited. An update will therefore be provided to Members at the meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee.

Ponteland Bypass

8.97 Saved policies relating to the Ponteland Relief Road (Local Plan Policies PT1 and PT3) have been reviewed. The proposed development does not necessitate delivery of this road and improvements are proposed at the town centre junctions. Whilst an increase in traffic would occur, the development would deliver improvements to the town centre junction and resultant impacts would not be severe. The development would be integrated into the town and future leisure/educational facilities and would maximise the opportunity for sustainable modes of transport.

Travel Plan

8.98 A Travel Plan has been submitted as part of the application which includes a site accessibility audit, draft travel plan aims and objectives, the role of a travel plan co-ordinator, sustainable travel initiatives, and targets and monitoring arrangements for the Travel Plan. Whilst the proposed residential and leisure/ education sites would be integrated to support sustainable transport modes and minimise impact on the road network, the submitted Travel Plan only covers the residential development. The proposed new education and leisure campus development would require it own Travel Plan arrangements.

8.99 The analysis undertaken as part of the development of the Travel Plan shows that the furthest point within the site is within 1km of the new educational and leisure facilities using the new south west link to the bridleway. The new routes through the site would improve access for the existing houses on Cheviot View. The Travel Plan also demonstrates that there are a number of employment, leisure, retail, health and food stores within 2km walking distance which includes, for example, Ponteland Town Centre, Newcastle International Airport and nearby industrial estates.

8.100 Bus services currently operate from the A696, Cheviot View and details of the services X77, X78, X79, 131 and 808 have been provided. The public transport operator, Stagecoach, has advised that maximising access on the existing corridor and improved waiting facilities, combined with an uplift in passengers, are important along the A696 corridor. There is currently minimal scope within the timetable to accommodate additional mileage. 50% of the proposed dwellings are within 400m of the site and the whole site is within 650m. The applicant proposes to improve the quality of the waiting facilities and available opportunities for direct access to the A696. The applicant has also recognised the desire for some services to access the site and identified routes and stops should future changes in the bus network occur. 8.101 The Council’s Travel Plan Officer has reviewed the submitted Travel Plan. Accessibility to bus services was highlighted as an issue, however taking into account the assessment set out in the Travel Plan, it is considered that a reasonable approach to public transport accessibility has been taken and the improved facilities along the A696 can be secured by planning condition. The measures, communication strategy, targets and monitoring set out in the Travel Plan, and appointment of a Travel Plan Co-ordinator until t years after full occupation of the development, is also welcomed.

Car and Cycle Parking

8.102 The applicant has recognised the Council’s car parking standards in their Design and Access Statement and the requirements are reflected in the illustrative site masterplan. Details in relation to the level/ exact layout of car parking within the site would be determined in subsequent reserved matters applications therefore can be dealt with adequately by planning conditions at this stage. The same applies to provision of facilities for cycle parking within the proposed scheme. Conclusion on Highway Matters

8.103 The Highways Authority has assessed the proposal and considers that in relation to the local highway network, subject to the recommended conditions and S106 planning obligations, it would not give rise to unacceptable traffic impacts that would fall within the definition of severe as set out in paragraph 32 of the NPPF. The proposal is therefore considered to accord with the NPPF; saved Policies PT1, PT3 and PR2 of the Local Plan; Policies 41, 42, 43 and 44 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy; and the draft South East Northumberland SPD in this respect. 8.104 Further information has been submitted by the applicant to address concerns raised by Highways England in relation to the potential impacts of the development on the Strategic Road Network. An update on this issue will be provided at the meeting of the Strategic Planning Committee. Design, Scale and Layout 8.105 NPPF paragraphs 56 and 57 stress the importance of planning positively for the achievement of high quality and inclusive design. Paragraph 64 reinforces this message by stating that permission should be refused for development of poor design that fails to take the opportunities available for improving the character and quality of an area and the way it functions. Local Plan Policy H15 seeks to pay attention to the design of buildings and their relationship to open spaces, and inclusion of landscaping, requires new housing developments to provide a safe and attractive environment and include public open space. It is considered that this policy, although pre-dating publication of the NPPF, aligns with many of its aspirations. 8.106 The site lies in the context of dwellings to the east with surrounding dwellings being single, two and three storeys in height comprising a mix of styles, materials, sizes, heights and character. There is little consistent distinctive vernacular style in terms of layout, design or materials. The application seeks for the appearance, scale, layout and landscaping of the site to be reserved for future consideration. Notwithstanding this, the submitted illustrative layout shows that the proposed development has the potential to be well laid out with aspects fronting onto open space and with availability for space for gardens and parking. There is little reason to consider that the development would not be able to be designed having regard to the character of the site and surrounding area, subject to conditions requiring the above reserved matters to be approved, as well as consideration of details such as materials, landscaping, and surface and boundary treatments. 8.107 The proposal would bring change to the visual environment but would not in itself be necessarily unattractive. It is considered that retention of structural landscaping, proposed tree planting and the incorporation of open green space would assist in assimilating the development into its surroundings over time. It is considered that the proposal could therefore be successfully developed into a scheme which would accord with Local Plan Policy H15; Parts 7 and 11 of the NPPF and emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy Policies 1, 2 and 30, and be of a design and layout that responds positively to the character of the site and its setting. Impact on existing and future residential amenity

8.108 Local Plan Policy H15 seeks to provide for adequate amenity and privacy for all residential occupiers and this is reflected in Policy 2 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy which seeks to protect residential amenity. Paragraph 120 of the NPPF seeks to ensure that new development is appropriate for its location while paragraph 123 of the Framework requires that planning decisions should aim to avoid noise from giving rise to significant adverse impacts on health and quality of life and mitigate and reduce to a minimum other adverse impacts on health and quality of life arising from noise, including through the use of conditions. Paragraph 125 also encourages the use of good design to limit the impact of light pollution from artificial light on local amenity. 8.109 Having regard to the relationship between the site and the nearest residential properties, it is important to consider whether potential adverse impacts could be mitigated or be reduced to a minimum through the use of conditions, if this is indeed necessary. There are residential properties to the east of the site and consideration should be given to potential wider impacts. It is acknowledged that the proposals are submitted in outline form, however the submitted illustrative plans demonstrate that it would be possible to site the dwellings in such a way that they have regard to the existing dwellings located on Cheviot View and achieve satisfactory separation distances between existing and proposed properties. Landscape Impact 8.110 NPPF Paragraph 109 states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by protecting and enhancing valued landscapes. Paragraph 113 advises that Local Planning Authorities should set criteria based policies against which proposals for any development on or affecting protected landscape areas will be judged. Distinctions should be made between the hierarchy of international, national and locally designated sites. 8.111 Policy 30 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy reflects the advice contained in the NPPF and makes clear that, in assessing development proposals in relation to landscape character, consideration will be given to, amongst other things, the guiding principles and other relevant guidelines set out in the Northumberland Landscape Character Assessment; historic landscape characterisation; the possibility of wider landscape and townscape impacts; and any net negative cumulative effects of development on landscape character, taking into account other existing and approved developments that have already been assessed as having a negative impact. 8.112 The applicant has commissioned Wardell Armstrong to carry out a full Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA). The LVIA follows the methodology recommended by accepted guidelines taking into account that this is not EIA development. A mixture of desk and site survey methods have been used. The following published studies provide a strategic assessment of the study area:

Natural England’s National Character Areas (NCAs);

The Northumberland Landscape Character Assessment; and

The Northumberland Key Land Use Impact Study

The LVIA describes the following characteristics of the site:

Landform and drainage;

Land use and land cover;

Built environment;

Roads and rights of way; and

Landscape features.

8.113 The LVIA recognises that the site is likely to be valued locally because of its proximity to the settlement edge and its visibility from the recreational disused railway line. Although the land is in agricultural use its character is strongly influenced by the prominence of existing properties at Cheviot View, which gives it an urban edge character. Of the 12 trees identified within the site, six are in decline. Existing hedgerows are severely degraded and in places very ‘gappy’. Therefore, the landscape value of the site is considered to be low to medium. 8.114 The LVIA incorporated an appraisal of landscape effects, the impact on the visual amenity and it identified all residential receptors and assessed the impact on those. It also considered how the proposal would impact on the transport and rights of way network from a landscaping perspective, and on users of open space/recreation areas. 8.115 The LVIA concludes with suggested mitigation measures and the cumulative impact visual impacts between this proposed development and the proposed Callerton Lane development. It further concludes that effects in the landscape of the site and surrounding area would not exceed moderate adverse. Adverse landscape effects would be due to loss of the agricultural land and its replacement with residential properties. However, while the introduction of housing to the site would create an adverse landscape effect, in the landscape context of the existing urban influence of properties at Cheviot View, the containment provided by landform and boundary vegetation and reduced tranquillity in the vicinity of the site due to the adjacent Ponteland Road, Rotary Way and Newcastle International Airport, the proposal would not be uncharacteristic. 8.116 In addition, by progressing the development proposal at the site, there is opportunity for beneficial impacts upon the landscape of the site in the form of:

Better control of flooding at the site through introduction of the proposed

SUDS providing water management;

Improved landscape structure by removing declining trees and defunct

hedgerows at the site and replacing with a green network comprised of

native species providing biodiversity corridors across the site; and

Greatly improved connectivity of the pedestrian and cycle network across

the site facilitating access to the wider right of way network.

8.117 The proposed residential development would be a prominent change to visual receptors immediately adjacent to the site. However, due to the prominence of existing properties at Cheviot View the proposal would not be uncharacteristic in the

wider landscape setting. Receptors in the immediate vicinity of the site would potentially experience moderate to substantial and substantial adverse effects. These effects would reduce with time as planting, in accordance with the Landscape Masterplan, matures and visibility of the proposal reduces. 8.118 Due to the strong containment of the site, status of visual effects would quickly reduce with distance. Slight to moderate visual effects would be experienced by a limited number of receptors out to 2km to the south-east in the landscape around Black Callerton.

8.119 Outside of 2km the proposed development would benefit from screening by landform, built form and vegetation and is unlikely to give rise to adverse visual effects. The applicant’s submission concludes that the landscape on the south east edge of Ponteland has the capacity to accommodate a development of this nature.

8.120 The LVIA has been considered by Officers who are of the view that the report uses the appropriate landscape classifications and studies at a national, County and local level. Specific landscape references related to the application site have been used to consider the local characteristics of the site and area. Officers are of the view that there are some contradictions and misinterpretations of the landscape character assessment criteria within the report. Whilst the report does form assumptions that 400 new houses west of Cheviot View would be able to be assimilated into the landscape character due to the prominence of existing properties at Cheviot View, this is not entirely supported by Officers. Officers concur with the LVIA in terms of the site and locale being a predominantly agricultural landscape and the introduction of the proposed residential development would greatly contrast with the existing view. The conclusion that the receptors in the immediate vicinity of the site would potentially experience moderate to substantial adverse effects is also shared. 8.121 Notwithstanding this, the offering of mitigation landscaping would achieve, in the medium-long term, a softening of the edges of an urban landscape accommodating 400 dwellings and would seek to satisfactorily overcome the areas of concern. In conclusion, therefore, the landscaping proposals and the impact of the proposed development on landscape character are considered to acceptable. Impact on Trees 8.122 The applicant commissioned AJT to carry out a tree survey in relation to the proposed which assessed 12 different trees on the site that would be affected. No trees of high quality and value (Category A) were identified in the survey. Three trees (two lime and one oak) were assigned to the moderate quality and value category (Category B), whilst three trees (two sycamore and one ash) were assigned to the low quality and value category (Category C). Six trees (five ash and one sycamore) were assigned to the poor quality and value category (Category U). Two of these trees were recommended for felling irrespective of any development proposals. It is unfortunate that the larger, more mature specimens within the site are suffering from Ash Die-Back Disease which is the limiting factor for their future life. 8.123 The County Ecologist has assessed the proposal and has confirmed that several trees at the site are likely to be veteran trees given their girth. Veteran trees are a material consideration when making a planning decision. Paragraph 118 of the NPPF regards veteran trees as having the same status as ancient woodland in that

they constitute irreplaceable habitats which, if development results in deterioration of the veteran trees, then planning permission should be refused.

8.124 There remains a lack of clarity between the submitted constraints plan (HJB/PA766/70a), the tree report (AJT, Nov 2016) and assurances received that mature trees do not need to be felled as part of the development.

8.125 The County Ecologist raised concern that, in time, where those retained trees are seen as a risk to people and property they would be felled, where otherwise without the development they would be retained and would be able to exist, albeit in a slowly declining state for many years. This risk is beyond the risk associated with the initial construction at the site and the need for root protection zones as documented in the tree report. Given this risk, in the context of paragraph 118 of the NPPF a condition is recommended as set out below. Flooding and Drainage 8.126 Paragraph 93 of the NPFF notes that planning plays a key role in helping shape places to secure radical reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, minimising vulnerability and providing resilience to the impact of climate change, and supporting the delivery of renewable and low carbon energy. Local Planning Authorities should adopt proactive strategies to mitigate and adapt to climate change, taking full account of flood risk, coastal change and water supply and demand considerations. 8.127 Paragraph 94 of the NPPF sets out that full account should be taken of flood risk, coastal change and water supply and demand considerations. Paragraph 103 sets out that when determining planning applications, Local Planning Authorities should ensure flood risk is not increased elsewhere. 8.128 Saved Local Plan Policy RE4 details that the Council will resist any development which, in its opinion, after consultation with the Environment Agency, may adversely affect the quality of surface, underground or coastal waters as a result of the nature of surface or waste water discharge, or give rise to pollution problems resulting from the disturbance of contaminated land. The Council will support initiatives which lead to improvements in surface or coastal water quality including the provision of new or improved water and sewage treatment facilities. Local Plan Policy RE5 states that proposals for new development will not be permitted in flood risk areas or where development may increase the risk of flooding elsewhere. Finally, Policy RE6 details that the Council will consider the implications of granting planning permission for new developments as they affect land drainage, water supply and sewerage. Where the development is likely to require the improvement or provision of additional services, consideration will be given to the need to impose planning conditions or seek legal agreements as appropriate. 8.129 Policy 37 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy states that the potential for both on and off-site flood risk from all potential sources must be measured. Development proposals will be required to demonstrate how they will minimise flood risk to people, property and infrastructure from all potential sources. Flood Risk Assessment 8.130 The applicant commissioned Patrick Parsons Ltd to provide a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and drainage strategy for the proposed development. The FRA

describes the topography of the site in detail. Because the site is exclusively utilised for agricultural purposes it is considered that the site should be treated as a Greenfield site for the purposes of FRA. 8.131 The FRA assesses the underlying geology and hydrology of the site. It notes its relationship with the River Pont approximately 320m to the west. The nearest watercourse to the site is the Fairney Burn which partly bounds the site in the west and north. The FRA notes that the Fairney Burn approaches the site in the south-west corner via an existing culvert beneath a former railway bridleway then flows northwards before leaving the site adjacent the north-east corner through another existing culvert beneath Ponteland Road. The Fairney Burn discharges into the River Pont approximately 800m to the north.

8.132 Northumbrian Water sewer record plans have been obtained for the site. They indicate the presence of three surface water sewers discharging into the Fairney Burn in the proximity of the site. The FRA also notes an unrecorded surface water piped outfall discharging into the Fairney Burn near the western boundary of the site. Three foul water sewers cross the site as described in the FRA.

8.133 The FRA notes the presence of two existing flood alleviation measures in the vicinity of the site. Flood walls and embankments that give a standard of protection of up to 1 in 100 years and are located on the Banks of the River Pont. There is also a short flood defence embankment adjacent to the north-west corner of the site within the Ponteland Leisure Centre grounds that gives a standard of protection of up to 1 in 10 years to the properties of Fairney Edge and adjacent properties to the north-west of the site. Potential sources of flooding 8.134 The Environment Agency Flood Zone Map shows the extent of the extreme flood from rivers or the sea that would occur without the presence of flood defences. The FRA explains the meaning of Flood Zones 1, 2 and 3. The map is indicative only, and is not to be used as the sole basis for decisions. The FRA shows the extent of these areas superimposed onto an indicative development layout. The proposed dwellings are shown to be located outside Flood Zones 2 & 3. This means that the chance of flooding each year from rivers or the sea is 0.1% (1 in 1000) or less. Parts of the site which are located within Flood Zones 2 and 3 are proposed to remain undeveloped and allocated for public open space.

8.135 Further data has been requested from the Environment Agency to confirm the effect that future climate change would have on the level and extent of flooding near the site. The Environment Agency confirmed that there are two sources of flooding on the site; the River Pont and the Fairney Burn. The existing flood model for the Fairney Burn does not extend sufficiently to fully model the watercourse in the vicinity of the site and therefore further modelling was recommended, expanding the Fairney Burn model up to the culvert under the bridleway on the western boundary of the site, as well as modelling to include the appropriate climate change allowance. 8.136 The Surface Water Flood Map identifies that the site is subject to localised flooding adjacent to the Fairney Burn in the north-west and the south-west corners of the site. It also confirms a localised depression through the southern part of the site.

8.137 In order to consider the risk of flooding from public sewers a pre-development enquiry was submitted by the applicant to Northumbrian Water. The response from

Northumbrian Water confirms two incidents. One is within the site and corresponds with the Flood Zone map so it could be as a result of high water levels in the Fairney Burn which may have restricted flows within the surface water sewers due to a submerged outlet. The second incident occurred within residential properties at Cheviot View. This flooding may have been due to the capacity of the existing private surface water drainage serving the properties of Cheviot View.

8.138 Historic Flood Maps record that the most northern part of the site has experienced localised flooding associated with the River Pont to the north-west of the site and the Fairney Burn on the north-west boundary of the site. Flooding is recorded both upstream and downstream of the culvert beneath Clickemin Bridge adjacent to the north-east corner of the site. These locations correspond with the Environment Agency Flood Zone Map.

8.139 The FRA notes that the Fairney Burn approaches the site in the south-west corner via a culvert pipe which acts as a throttle, restricting surface water flows from the upstream catchment to the south of the site. This is demonstrated by the Surface Water Flooding Map which shows surface water flooding within the grassland to the east of the High School. This culvert structure therefore provides a limit to the flow rate in the Fairney Burn watercourse near the site. It is proposed that this culvert will continue to perform this role.

8.140 The Fairney Burn exits the boundary of the site in the north-east corner via an existing culvert beneath Ponteland Road at Clickemin Bridge which could also potentially act as a restriction for flows discharging from the site.

8.141 The FRA indicates that the maximum levels of the Flood Zones would be 56.1m AOD for Flood Zone 3 and 60m AOD for Flood Zone 2. To these levels should be added an allowance of 0.6m to allow for future climate change.

8.142 The new development, including main access routes and surface water attenuation basins, is located outside of the current extent of Flood Zone 2 and Flood Zone 3. This will protect the development from the effect of flooding from the Fairney Burn as well as surface water flooding. Surface water drainage 8.143 The FRA sets out at a sequence of preference for surface water management on developments such as West Clickemin Farm:

Discharge to soakaway or other infiltration system

Discharge to a watercourse

Discharge to a public sewer network.

8.144 The desk-top ground investigation undertaken with reference to British Geological Survey mapping has indicated that the underlying geology of the site is likely to rule out successful infiltration. This would be confirmed in due course by way of an intrusive site investigation.

8.145 The second best option is to discharge to a watercourse, in this case the Fairney Burn which abuts the site and is considered a suitable discharge point for surface water from the new development.

8.146 Furthermore there is no part of the surface water sewer network which appears to provide a suitable point of discharge. Therefore option 2 is clearly most appropriate method of surface water management for the proposed development.

8.147 The attenuation basins and any other SUDs further features incorporated within the site would be adopted and maintained by either Northumberland County Council or a suitable management company. 8.148 In addition to maintaining greenfield run-off rates it is proposed to provide flood shelving to the banks of the Fairney Burn within the site as shown on the Preliminary Surface Water and Foul Water Drainage Strategy Plan in Appendix P of the FRA. The flood shelving would lower existing ground levels adjacent to the watercourse to provide additional flood storage within the existing flood zones and areas of previous surface water flooding, reducing risk of flooding to the proposed development and adjacent existing housing to the north west of the site. This would lead to a betterment over the current situation.

8.149 The applicant has made their willingness to co-operate with the Council over investigating ways of increasing the flow of the Fairney Burn under the A696 clear, which is currently a throttle which may be a contributing factor to current flood risk north west of the site. Foul water drainage 8.150 Northumbrian Water has confirmed that foul water flows should be kept separate from surface water flows in accordance with Building Regulations. The foul water flows from the new development, calculated to be 18.4 litres per second, can discharge without restriction into the existing 300mm-diameter foul water sewer via a manhole located within the northern corner of the site. Northumbrian Water has also confirmed that infrastructure improvement works are programmed that would accommodate the full development and that until these works are completed foul flows from an initial build rate of approximately 30 units per year can be accepted.

8.151 Northumbrian Water has advised that the downstream sewage Treatment Works to which the new development will finally discharge is able to accept the additional flows. To discharge all foul water flows to the manhole by gravity and avoid the need for a foul water pumping station it would be necessary to raise existing ground levels in the south-west corner of the development. The level to which ground levels would need to raise would depend upon the detailed design of foul water drainage for the development. Routes of adoptable foul water drainage should be as direct as possible from this area to the outfall to minimise the depth of build-up required. Appendix P of the FRA indicates the approximate extent over which ground levels will need to be raised.

8.152 The FRA concludes that surface water created by the development of the site would not raise the risk of flooding, due to any watercourses overtopping, nor to the area located adjacent to the development. Indeed the design would reduce the impact of surface water for reasons set out above. 8.153 The residential development within the site falls entirely into a Category Zone 1 classification and therefore no Sequential Test is required. Furthermore, there would be no raising of levels within the area designated as Flood Zones 2 and 3 within the site. Instead new flood shelves would be created at points along the eastern bank of the Fairney Burn which would retain and increase the current flood

attenuation volume within the area. The FRA has therefore confirmed (subject to outstanding modelling) that the proposed development is appropriate and sustainable in the terms as set out in NPPF. 8.154 The Local Lead Flood Authority (LLFA) has been consulted on the proposals has confirmed that the current natural drainage within the boundary for this development site is completely greenfield. The submitted information shows that there are two defined catchments within the red line boundary. Both of these catchments naturally drain to the Fairney Burn.

8.155 Post development surface water discharge from the development would still go to the Fairney Burn and the two defined catchments would remain. Surface water would be restricted to a rate of 4.39 l/s/ha for all rainfall events. This would see a reduction on the rates which currently go into the watercourse in the higher rainfall events. Attenuation would be provided on site via basins and/or ponds, as well as underground pipes. This would ensure flood risk is effectively dealt with for all rainfall events up to and including the 1 in 100 year plus climate change event.

8.156 A condition has been recommended for the attenuation basins and/or ponds would be located outside of the 1 in 1000 year flood extent from the Fairney Burn and river Pont. Further sustainable drainage systems such as permeable paving would be looked at in further detail at the reserved matters/discharge of condition stage of the development. The adoption and maintenance of all features would be by Northumbrian Water and/or a private management company.

8.157 Having reviewed the extensive information submitted by the applicant, the Local Lead Flood Authority are satisfied that the drainage proposals would in fact offer a betterment to the existing provision and would reduce current watercourse rates whilst, at the same time, addressing and dealing with flood risk matters. On this basis, there are no grounds to raise further concern with regard to drainage and flooding proposals and the scheme is considered acceptable in this regard. Ecology 8.158 In line with the requirements of the NPPF, saved Policy C11 of the Local Plan states that proposals will be assessed in terms of their potential impact on the nature conservation interests of the site and on any habitats/species present. Paragraph 109 of the NPPF states that the planning system should contribute to and enhance the natural and local environment by:

Protecting and enhancing valued landscapes, geological conservation

interest and soils;

Recognising the wider benefits of ecosystem services; and

Minimising impacts on biodiversity and providing net gains in biodiversity

where possible, contributing to the Government’s commitment to halt the overall decline in biodiversity.

8.159 Paragraph 118 of the NPPF sets out that Local Planning Authorities should aim to conserve and enhance biodiversity by permitting development where the primary objective is to conserve or enhance biodiversity. 8.160 Policy 29 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy also states that adverse impacts of development proposals affecting biodiversity and

geodiversity should be minimised by avoiding unacceptable harm, mitigation and compensation. Biodiversity gains/wider ecological enhancements will be sought where viable. 8.161 In 2012, BSG Ecology was commissioned to undertake a Habitat Survey of the application site as well as Breeding Bird, Bat, Badger, Great Crested Newt, Otter and Vole surveys. In 2016, it was decided that these surveys should be revisited to ensure that the assessments were up to date. The aim of the ecological assessments was to assess the potential ecological interest within the site and to identify any ecological constraints (in particular protected species) that would need to be taken into account during the design, construction and occupation phases of the development.

8.162 A desk study was carried out which interrogated records of nature conservation interest in and around the site to a distance of 2km. The boundaries of the survey were extended beyond the planning application boundary. There are two statutory designated sites within 2km of the site; Darras Hall Grassland SSSI and Prestwick Carr SSSI. There are also two non-designated sites; Prestwick Carr Local Wildlife Site and Prestwick Burn.

8.163 The two SSSIs are considered to be far enough away from the site not to be affected during the construction or occupation phases. Darras Hall Grassland is entirely surrounded by houses and it is not linked to the application site leading to a low likelihood of additional recreational use. Prestwick Carr SSSI is not accessible to the public. 8.164 The surveys undertaken did not highlight any significant habitats. It concluded that the value of the site is extremely limited and there is potential for habitat enhancement as part of the application. 8.165 These conclusions were consistent with the ecological advice provided following the request for an EIA screening opinion in 2016. This concluded that mitigation should focus on protective the Fairney Burn at the western limit of the site. The creation of a ‘semi-natural buffer’ between the burn and development was considered essential. This informed the masterplan proposals within this planning application. Bats 8.166 The County Ecologist has provided comments on the survey work undertaken and concurs with the findings of the bat report. In order to conserve the present foraging bat population, a planning condition would be attached, which is detailed later in the report. Designated Sites

8.167 The development site is within a Natural England SSSI impact risk zone (Darras Hall Grassland SSSI and Prestwick Carr SSSI). The County Ecologist is satisfied however that due to the nature of the development and the distance to those sites (over 1km) from the proposed scheme, it is not considered that the development would pose a risk of significant harm to those designated sites.

Habitats

8.168 The habitats present are arable land, poor-semi improved grassland, mature trees and hedgerows. Of these, the main ecological value is the mature trees and the hedgerows, and it is critical that mature/veteran trees are retained. A number of species poor hedgerow would be lost as part of the development given the current proposed site masterplan. Hedgerows are a priority habitat therefore this is a material consideration. The site layout as proposed shows significant mitigation to compensate for this loss in terms of planting and wildflower meadows however, hence the need below for a holistic biodiversity management plan. In addition, the Fairney Burn is present to the west of the site, which is likely to be enhanced by the creation of semi-nature buffers as shown

Protected species and priority species

8.169 Badgers are present in the area although no evidence of setts in use were found within the boundary of the application site. Otter may occasionally use the Fairney Burn corridor hence the requirement to protect the burn from pollutants during the construction of the development. The County Ecologist concurs that great crested newts are unlikely to be present at the site. The nearest population is over 250m away from the site and the site itself provided poor newt habitat. In addition, the burn is likely to be a barrier to newt movement from the west to the site itself. Water vole and reptiles, both a potential material consideration being protected species, have been considered although the County Ecologist concurs that both are likely to be absent from the site, given that the habitat is currently unsuitable.

Birds

8.170 The assemblage of birds present is representative of the relatively poor habitat, however the hedgerows do support birds of conservation concern such as dunnock and yellowhammer. In addition, the arable field supports a small population of lapwing (in 2016 a single pair). Whilst the small lapwing population is likely to be lost the masterplan demonstrates that the scheme is likely to be beneficial to birds overall in the long term. However, in the short term until the landscaping planting matures there is a need to include a nest box scheme which should be part of a holistic biodiversity management plan.

8.171 All wild birds and their nests are protected when in use and this will, therefore, need to be accounted for before any works commence (nesting period for most species would be fully encompassed by the period March - August inclusive). Accordingly a planning condition shall be imposed on any grant of planning permission restricting timing of vegetation clearance should Members be minded to approve the application. Biodiversity Management Plan

8.172 Given the scale of the site and the habitats and species to consider, including mitigation and habitat creation, the County Ecologist has suggested that a holistic biodiversity management plan is secured by planning condition in the event that planning permission is granted. The biodiversity management plan would then be the single document which deals with all mitigation, planting, protected species and habitat creation. The recommendations of the bird strike report are very limiting with regard to the types of habitat which can be created. Those requirements are very

restrictive with regard to tree types, berry bearing shrubs and the length of grassland.

8.173 The development changes the land from being very open to being enclosed. Species such as gulls, crows, larks, geese, waders and wood pigeons prefer open ground, when the land is developed and becomes enclosed their numbers will drop very significantly. This being the case the development itself would be a substantial net benefit to bird strike safeguarding. For example, the bird strike mitigation scheme suggests that grassland should be kept at a length as to avoid attracting geese, however this is unnecessary because the areas of grassland shown on the landscape masterplan to be created are relatively small, rather than large open fields which may be attractive to geese and flocks of waders. Indeed this development in this respect can be seen to be an overall decrease in the risk of open habitats which may attract wildfowl and waders. The large field as it is could be left as winter stubble or as permanent pasture for agricultural reasons which would potentially attract wildfowl; the development innately removes this risk at a stroke by removing open habitats. The suggested limitation to grass length by the bird strike report is not logical.

8.174 Despite reservations about the limitations the bird strike report seeks to impose and the logic behind those reasons, it is suggested that a number of valuable habitat types can be created. This could include damp woodland (willow, alder and downey birch), with a limited proportion of oaks and small areas of species rich grassland, which are bordered by trees and hedgerows, thereby being unsuitable for geese.

8.175 Accordingly, in the event that planning permission is granted, a planning condition should be attached requesting a biodiversity management plan to be submitted prior to the commencement of any works on the site.

Mammals 8.176 Mammals such as hedgehog and badger may enter the site during the works and following the development. These species should therefore be protected by simple precautions and conditions are recommended to address this.

8.177 Overall, subject to the recommended conditions it is considered that the proposed development would accord with the NPPF; Local Plan Policies C9, C10, C11, C12, C13 and PC4; and Policies 28 and 29 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy which all seek to conserve and enhance the natural environment. Heritage Matters 8.178 Sections 16, 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 have been referred to in forming an assessment of potential impacts of the proposal on heritage interests. In considering whether to grant planning permission for development which affects a listed building or its setting, the Council must have special regard to the desirability of preserving the building or its setting or any features of special architectural or historic interest which it possesses. Similarly, special attention must be paid to the desirability of preserving or enhancing the character or appearance of any conservation area.

8.179 Chapter 12 `Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment` of the NPPF (paragraphs 126 to 141) is also an important material consideration in determining the application whilst Historic England (previously English Heritage) has also published a suite of guidance relevant to the scheme including:

Conservation Principles (2008) Historic Environment Good Practice Advice in Planning Note 3 “The

Setting of Heritage Assets” (March 2015) 8.180 Paragraph 128 of the NPPF states that in determining applications, Local Planning Authorities should require an applicant to describe the significance of any heritage assets affected, including any contribution made by their setting. Paragraph 129 goes on to state that Local Planning Authorities should identify and assess the particular significance of any heritage asset that may be affected by a proposal (including development affecting the setting of a heritage asset). They should take this assessment into account when considering the impact of a proposal on a heritage asset, to avoid or minimise conflict between the heritage assets conservation and any aspect of the proposals. 8.181 NPPF paragraph 131 makes clear that in determining applications, Local Planning Authorities should take account of a number of criteria, in particular the desirability of sustaining and enhancing the significance of heritage assets. Paragraphs 132 states that when considering the impact of a proposed development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, great weight should be given to the asset’s conservation. The more important the asset, the greater the weight should be. Significance can be harmed or lost through alteration or destruction of the heritage asset or development within its setting. As heritage assets are irreplaceable, any harm or loss should require clear and convincing justification. 8.182 Paragraphs 132 - 134 introduce the concept that harm can be caused by development that affects the setting and significance of heritage assets. The degrees of harm are defined as ‘total loss’, ‘substantial harm’ or ‘less than substantial harm’ and these paragraphs of the Framework introduce the need to balance any harm against the benefits of the development. This is reflected in Policy 33 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy. 8.183 The “setting” of a heritage asset is defined in the NPPF as the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced. Its extent is not fixed and may change as the asset and its surroundings evolve. Elements of setting may make a positive or negative contribution to the significance of an asset, may affect the ability to appreciate that significance or may be neutral. 8.184 “Significance” is defined as the value of a heritage asset to this and future generations because of its heritage interest. That interest may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic. Significance derives not only from a heritage asset’s physical presence, but also from its setting. 8.185 The main issues to consider in this case are the indirect impacts that the proposed development comprising 400 residential dwellings (with associated infrastructure) would have on the significance and setting of heritage assets.

8.186 The submissions include a suite of documentation including a Design and Access Statement and proposed outline site plans including illustrative sketch

drawings of the proposed scheme. The Council’s Building Conservation Officer initially reviewed the submissions which also include a 5km Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) map. Cartographic and historical research was compiled as a means of identifying the heritage assets within the survey area whose setting and significance have the potential to be impacted by the proposed development. Further to site inspections undertaken by the Conservation Officer on 18 January 2017, an assessment has been undertaken in accordance with Historic England guidance on The Setting of Heritage Assets (2015) and the following actions taken:

1. Identified which heritage assets and their settings are affected by the development proposals;

2. Assessed whether, how and to what degree their setting makes a contribution to their significance;

3. Assessed the effects of the proposed development, on their significance;

4. Considered means in which to maximise enhancement, avoid or minimise harm; and

5. Complete comments for planning case officer to inform their decision making on the application.

8.187 Having regard to the aforementioned assessment process and agreed definition of setting (NPPF), the Conservation Officer has identified the following heritage assets whose setting has the potential to be impacted by the proposed developments.

The Badger Inn

8.188 The Badger Inn, formerly known as Street House Farmhouse, is a Grade II listed building. Dating to the late 18th century it is constructed in brick (English Garden Wall Bond) under stone and slate steeply-pitched roof with stepped gables. It comprises two-storeys with attic, three-bays with single storey and three-bay wings. Openings are square-head having 12-pane casement windows and a six-panelled door set within a 19th century gabled porch. The listed building is set back from the A696 enclosed by brick and stone walls. To the rear of the listed building is car parking with access to Dobbies Garden Centre. 8.189 The proposed site for housing development is situated to the northwest of the listed building in land bounded by Rotary Way. The approach to the listed building and views of it are channelled by the A696 with agricultural land having natural hedgerow field boundaries and trees. The Rotary Way roundabout is situated immediately beyond the listed building to its north. Having regard to the agreed definition of ‘setting’ (clarified in the NPPF) as “the surroundings in which a heritage asset is experienced” it is considered that while there may be a degree of intervisibility between the listed building and the application site, the proposed development would not harmfully impact the setting of the listed building in the context of NPPF paragraphs 132 - 134.

8.190 It is considered, having regard to Section 66 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act, Chapter 12 of the NPPF and Policy 33 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy that the overall proposals would not result in demonstrable harm to the Badger Inn, its setting or its features of special architectural and historic interest.

The Gosforth and Ponteland Light Railway

8.191 The Gosforth and Ponteland Light Railway is a non-designated heritage asset which runs through the southern part of the application site. The railway line operated from 1905 to 1929 for passengers and until 1965 for freight (Callerton ICI Works). The line is no longer in use. It remains as a bridleway which leads down to the River Pont and Ponteland Town Centre, crossing Rotary Way at an uncontrolled crossing point and forming part of the National Cycle Network Route 10 from North Shields to Cockermouth.

8.192 From a review of the outline proposals it is acknowledged that the heritage asset would be retained within the scheme. It is considered that an opportunity exists in which to enhance the heritage asset and its setting as part of landscaping proposals for the site. It is recommended that the scope of such works is determined as part of a subsequent reserved matters application.

Ponteland Conservation Area

8.193 Ponteland lies approximately 13km due south west of Morpeth. The historic core of the settlement was designated as a Conservation Area in 1970 with the boundary extended in 1988 by Castle Morpeth Council. On approach from Callerton Lane into the Conservation Area, the special character and appearance of Ponteland is informed by an attractive grouping of social, religious and industrial buildings with the river providing a pleasant open and natural gateway into the settlement. The former Methodist Church, three-storey brick Mock Tudor Public House and the sandstone Ponteland Bridge converge to create a sense of arrival into the historic core of the town. The ‘Diamond Inn’ with its Mock Tudor gabled frontage, brick and rendered walls with timber fretwork, and wide overhanging eaves acts as a visual anchor. On approach from the east, along Ponteland Road views are channelled and contained into the settlement with the junction where Callerton Lane meets the Main Street opening to provide views towards the south and southwest of the river. This contrast in plot layout and building density positively contributes to the character and setting of the Conservation Area.

8.194 On approach from North Road and Main Street from the west, again views are channelled into the settlement. The breaks between the linear street frontages provide glimpses out of the settlement. However, the proposed development site situated to the south east of the Conservation Area is not visible. Building heights range between single and two storeys with traditional buildings having pitched slate and tiled roofs. The presence of mature trees to the rear of properties creates a soft frame to the street scene and serves to restrict wider views out of designated heritage asset.

8.195 It is considered having cognisance for Section 72(2) of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act, Chapter 12 of the NPPF and Policy 33 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy that the overall proposals would not result in demonstrable harm to the character, appearance and setting of the Ponteland Conservation Area.

Clickemin Bridge

8.196 Situated to the north of the proposed development site is the non-designated heritage asset Clickemin Bridge. It dates to the mid-19th century and crosses the Fairney Burn. The setting of the Bridge is localised and the ability to appreciate and

understand its significance is not experienced until within immediate proximity. It is considered having regard to NPPF Chapter 12 that the development proposals would not result in demonstrable harm to Clickemin Bridge.

8.197 In conclusion, these observations have been completed having regard to Sections 16, 66 and 72 of the Planning (Listed Buildings and Conservation Areas) Act 1990 and statutory policy (National Planning Policy Framework, Chapter 12 ‘Conserving and Enhancing the Historic Environment) and Policy 33 of the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy. No objection is raised to the application in heritage terms. Archaeology 8.198 Section 12 of the NPPF provides guidance on the treatment of archaeological remains within the planning process. Whilst it is recognised that important remains should be retained, the benefits of development may be considered to outweigh the benefit of retention, especially where remains of less than national importance are concerned. Paragraph 135 of the NPPF in this respect states that the impact of a development upon the significance of a non-designated heritage asset should be taken into account in determining applications. 8.199 An archaeological trial trenching report has been submitted with the application for consideration by the County Archaeologist. The evaluation provided a lot of clarification of the nature and survival of archaeological remains across the site. 8.200 The evaluation was sufficient to identify two distinct areas in the north and south east of the application site requiring further archaeological excavation. It will therefore be necessary for the developer to commission a professional archaeologist to undertake the excavations in these areas. The excavations would need to be carried out in line with a detailed, site specific brief which has been tied to a planning condition as recommended below. 8.201 Given that many of the archaeological remains lie directly beneath the topsoil and the ephemeral nature of many of the features, it is important that the excavation areas are not subject to damage, truncation or disturbance before the archaeological excavations have been completed. In order to ensure the preservation of these features until they can be preserved by record, it is recommended that an appropriately worded condition be imposed on the planning permission in the event that the application is approved, in which the excavation areas are fenced to prevent vehicular access or the storage of soil, material or equipment within the excavation areas. Newcastle International Airport 8.202Newcastle International Airport (NIA) has been consulted in respect of this application given the proximity of the site to the Airport and its flight path. NIA has objected to the scheme on the basis of potential additional traffic flows adversely impacting on their access junction with the A696. The basis of their objection is undergoing further consideration with a view to having the areas of concern addressed. Notwithstanding this, at the time of compiling this report, the objection is valid and an update on this matter will provided to Members in an Addendum Report prior to the meeting of Strategic Planning Committee.

S106 Planning Obligations 8.203 A Section 106 agreement would be necessary in this case, in accordance with the tests set out in Section 122(2) of the Community Infrastructure Levy (CIL) Regulations 2010, to ensure that the development is acceptable in planning terms. The items listed below would form the basis of the S106 Agreement and, in addition to being necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, would also be directly related to the development, and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development:

Financial Obligations

1. Financial contribution towards construction of a new Primary School, Secondary School, Leisure Centre and associated playing pitches with trigger points for payments to be agreed.

2. Off-site financial contribution towards affordable housing provision in lieu of on-site provision with triggers points for payments to be agreed.

3. Financial contribution towards improvements to Ponteland town centre junctions of the A696 in the form on one single payment on occupation of the 50th dwelling.

4. Financial contribution for improvements to the drainage system to enable development in the form of one single payment prior to commencement.

Non-Financial Obligations

1. Provision of access across the site to access Council playing fields. The access would be provided from implementation of the development and a permanent route to be incorporated within the scheme.

2. Open space to be provided within the development and maintained for the duration of the development or until adopted by the Council, as shown for indicative purposes on Plan 6, or such other public open space as may be approved by the Council.

3. Not to occupy 90% of dwellings within any phase of the development until greenspace is finished to the satisfaction of the Council.

4. Submit maintenance proposals for each phase prior to occupation of the 1st dwelling in that phase.

5. To maintain the greenspace for the duration of the development or until such time that the Council adopts the greenspace.

9. Conclusion and the Planning Balance 9.1 The NPPF places the delivery of housing high on the Government agenda in terms of delivering a wide choice of high quality homes. The intentions and objectives behind sustainable growth, accelerated housing delivery and the need for more homes nationally, regionally and locally are very clear and this has recently been reinforced in the Housing White Paper. 9.2 This report has set out the reasons behind the proposed release of this Green Belt site which has been planned as such for a number of years through the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy. Although limited weight can be attached to an emerging Development Plan, the intention to alter the Green Belt boundary to allow this site and the immediately adjacent land to the north and west to come forward for a mix of housing, education and leisure uses to meet the

identified needs for Ponteland over the plan period is an important and relevant consideration in the determination of the application. 9.3 The planning application seeks to bring forward land in a location which has for some time been identified as being in the right place to support the future growth requirements of the town. The complementary nature of the concurrent proposals would ensure that the development would proceed in a coordinated manner so that the proposal would achieve the highest standards of sustainable development. Moreover, the provision of up to 400 new dwellings on this site, which would include provision for the equivalent provision of 15% affordable housing in a more central location within Ponteland, would make a significant and meaningful contribution towards delivery of the objectively assessed housing need for the town over the duration of the plan period i.e. 900 dwellings by 2031. 9.4 Notwithstanding this however, the site remains in the Green Belt until such time that the emerging Northumberland Local Plan Core Strategy has been examined and adopted by the Council. In this context, new housing development in the open countryside and Green Belt at the present time conflicts with saved Policies C1, C17, PC1 and H16 of the Local Plan. As inappropriate development, which is by definition harmful to the Green Belt, the proposed development should not be approved except in very special circumstances. Very special circumstances will not exist unless the potential harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness, and any other harm identified, is clearly outweighed by other considerations. (NPPF paras 87 and 88). 9.5 The harm caused by the loss of the Green Belt in advance of a formal and recognised change in the Green Belt boundary should, of course, not be underestimated. Indeed, the Council’s own assessment has concluded that this area of land makes a ‘medium contribution’ to the Green Belt. However, development in this area would not increase the risk of mergence between Ponteland and Newcastle as there is already built development (Cheviot View) extending in a southerly direction towards the south eastern edge of the application site. The land is also bound by Rotary which provides a hard and very definite boundary between the site and the proposed retained Green Belt land beyond. 9.6 Whilst giving substantial weight to the impact on the Green Belt as a consequence of this development, it is considered the wider public benefits the scheme would bring in this case would significantly and demonstrably outweigh the harm to the Green Belt by reason of inappropriateness and other harm identified in this report. Very special circumstances are clearly a matter of judgement, however in this case it is considered that there are two compelling very special circumstances which overwhelmingly outweigh the harm. Firstly, the proposal would provide for a significant financial contributions towards delivery of the proposed education and leisure campus on the land immediately to the north west of the site, including new and improved playing pitch provision, which would result in major qualitative improvements and benefits for the people of Ponteland. Secondly, and as already set out above, there is clear emerging policy support for the release of this site from the Green Belt to assist in meeting the objectively assessed housing need for the town. These factors, together and in combination with other benefits such as the creation of around 120 jobs over the duration of the construction period, are considered to provide the very special circumstances necessary in this to outweigh the harm to the Green Belt through inappropriateness and the other harm identified.

9.7 For these reasons the development can be fully supported and, subject to the recommended conditions and Section 106 planning obligations, it would achieve sustainable development in social, economic and environmental terms thus according with the NPPF and all relevant local planning policies, both existing and emerging. 10. Recommendation 10.1 That the Committee is minded to APPROVE this application subject to the following conditions, subject to referral to the National Planning Casework Unit for a determination on whether the Secretary of State wishes to call-in the application for his own determination, and subject to the completion of a Section 106 Agreement securing the following:

Financial Obligations

1. Financial contribution towards construction of a new Primary School, Secondary School, Leisure Centre and associated playing pitches with trigger points for payments to be agreed.

2. Off-site financial contribution towards affordable housing provision in lieu of on-site provision with triggers points for payments to be agreed.

3. Financial contribution towards improvements to Ponteland town centre junctions of the A696 in the form on one single payment on occupation of the 50th dwelling.

4. Financial contribution for improvements to the drainage system to enable development in the form of one single payment prior to commencement.

Non-Financial Obligations

1. Provision of access across the site to access Council playing fields. The access would be provided from implementation of the development and a permanent route to be incorporated within the scheme.

2. Open space to be provided within the development and maintained for the duration of the development or until adopted by the Council, as shown for indicative purposes on Plan 6, or such other public open space as may be approved by the Council.

3. Not to occupy 90% of dwellings within any phase of the development until greenspace is finished to the satisfaction of the Council.

4. Submit maintenance proposals for each phase prior to occupation of the 1st dwelling in that phase.

5. To maintain the greenspace for the duration of the development or until such time that the Council adopts the greenspace.

Delegated authority is also to be granted to the Head of Service, in consultation with the Chair of Strategic Planning Committee, to amend the list of planning conditions set out below, as necessary, following the further comments of relevant statutory and non-statutory consultees. Conditions/Reason 1. Approval of details of the layout, scale, appearance and landscaping (hereinafter

called the 'reserved matters'), for that phase, shall be obtained from the Local Planning Authority in writing before the development within that phase is

commenced. The development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: To ensure satisfactory development in accordance with Section 92 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

2. Applications for the approval of the first reserved matters shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of 3 years from the date of this permission. The development shall be begun before the expiration of 5 years from the date of this permission or 3 years from the date of the final reserved matter approval, whichever is the later. Reason: To ensure that the development is commenced within a reasonable period of time from the date of this permission in accordance with Section 92 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

3. Application for the approval of the final reserved matters for the development shall be made to the Local Planning Authority before the expiration of 7 years from the date of this permission. The development consented under this reserved matters approval shall be begun before the expiration of 10 years from the date of this permission or 3 years from the date of this final reserved matters approval, whichever is the later. Reason: To ensure that the development is commenced within a reasonable period of time from the date of this permission in accordance with Section 92 of the Town & Country Planning Act 1990.

4. Development shall not commence until a detailed Phasing Plan for the timing and delivery of the development has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Phasing Plan shall set out the development phases and completion sequence across the site including reference to the type and extent of any development envisaged in each phase. Thereafter development of each phase shall be undertaken in accordance with the approved Phasing Plan. Reason: In the interests of properly programming the development to ensure residential amenity and highways safety and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

5. The development hereby permitted shall not be carried out otherwise than in complete accordance with the approved plans and documents. The approved plans and documents are: PA14 Detailed Access Proposals to Rotary Way; PA15 Detailed Access Proposals to Ponteland Road. Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning, and in order to achieve a satisfactory form of development.

6. Except where modified by the conditions attached to this planning permission, the development shall be carried out in broad accordance with the detail shown on the approved documents: PA10 Illustrative Concept Masterplan; PA11 Masterplan on Aerial Photograph; PA12 Movement Diagram; PA17 Illustrative Layout; Design and Access Statement; Transport Assessment November 2016; Addendum sensitivity test on local road network February 2017; Travel Plan.

Reason: For the avoidance of doubt and in the interests of proper planning, and in order to achieve a satisfactory form of development.

7. The total development hereby approved shall not exceed 400 residential units.

Reason: In order to define the consent and to control the total amount of development to achieve a satisfactory form of development

8. Development shall not commence on each phase until a Construction Method Statement has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved Construction Method Statement shall be adhered to throughout the construction period. The Construction Method Statement shall, where applicable, provide for: i. details of temporary traffic management measures, temporary access, routes and vehicles; ii. vehicle cleaning facilities; iii. the parking of vehicles of site operatives and visitors; iv. the loading and unloading of plant and materials; v. storage of plant and materials used in constructing the development; vi. measures to control the emission of dust and dirt; vii. details of temporary traffic management measures, temporary access, routes and vehicles; viii. the loading and unloading of plant and materials.

Reason: To prevent nuisance in the interests of residential amenity and highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework

9. Construction work and deliveries associated with the development shall only take place between the hours of 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday, 8am to 1pm on Saturdays but shall not take place on Sundays or Bank Holidays unless otherwise is approved in advance and in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: In the interests of the amenity of nearby residents and new residents at the site.

10. No development in any phase of the development shall be occupied until details regarding the proposed boundary treatment in that phase have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before the part of the development to which they relate is brought into use. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

11. The Proposed landscaping scheme is to be carried out in accordance with the Mitigation Measures contained within the Landscape and Visual Impact Appraisal undertaken by Wardell Armstrong (November 2016). Reason: in the interests of visual amenity and creating and acceptable form of development in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

12. Each phase of the development shall include details regarding the landscaping scheme, showing both hard and soft landscaping proposals, to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development of that phase. The landscape scheme shall include the following: Any trees, hedges and shrubs scheduled for retention; details of soft landscaping including planting species, sizes, layout, densities, numbers; Details of planting procedures or specification; Finished topsoil levels and depths; Details of temporary topsoil and subsoil storage provision; The establishment maintenance regime, including watering, rabbit protection, tree stakes, guards etc; Details of hard landscaping and public realm works; Details of means of enclosure including retaining walls; Details of the long term management proposals and details of the timescales of the implementation of the landscaping proposals shall also be submitted. The scheme shall be carried out in accordance with the approved drawings and not later than the expiry of the next planting season following commencement of development, or within such other time as may be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The landscaped areas shall be subsequently maintained to ensure the establishment of the approved scheme including watering, weeding and the replacement of any plants or areas which fail within a period of five years from the completion of that phase of development. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity and ensuring a satisfactory form of development in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

13. The proposed landscaping scheme, shall be designed and implemented in accordance with aerodrome safeguarding best practices and shall be approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Newcastle International Airport. Reason: In the interests of aerodrome safeguarding and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

14. Prior to commencement of development, a Bird Hazard Management Strategy

should be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority in conjunction with NIA. Thereafter the strategy shall be implemented for the lifetime of the development. Reason: In the interest of aerodrome safeguarding and to ensure the development has no impact upon the operation of Newcastle International Airport in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

15. No development in any phase shall commence until details of the existing and proposed site levels within that phase have been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before the development within that phase has been brought into use. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity of the area, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

16. No phase of the development shall be occupied until details of the provision of refuse and recycling storage and a refuse storage implementation strategy for

that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Thereafter the approved refuse storage facilities shall be implemented before that phase of the development is occupied. The development shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved details.

Reason: In the interests of the provision of adequate refuse storage/collection facilities and of general and visual amenities.

17. Each phase of the development shall include a schedule of all proposed materials to be used to be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority prior to commencement of development on that phase. The development in that phase shall be carried out in full accordance with the approved materials. Reason: In the interests of maintaining the quality of development in accordance with the National Planning Framework.

18. Development shall not commence until a full technical engineering scheme for the proposed highways works (including access arrangements relating to road widening and provision of designated right turn lanes) on Rotary Way and Ponteland Road has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved works shall be constructed and operational prior to occupation of the first dwelling.

Reason: To increase the capacity of the highway network to accommodate the vehicular traffic associated with the development and to achieve satisfactory junction arrangements, in the interests of highway safety.

19. No development in any phase shall be occupied until details of car parking for

that phase of the development have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority and implemented in accordance with the approved details. Thereafter, the car parking for that phase of the development shall be retained in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

20. No development in any phase shall commence until an Estate Street Phasing and Completion Plan for that phase has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The Estate Street Phasing and Completion Plan shall set out the development phases, completion sequence and construction standards that estate streets serving each phase of the development will be completed. The development shall then be carried out in accordance with the approved Estate Street Phasing and Completion Plan. Reason: To ensure estate streets serving the development are completed in the interests of residential amenity and highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework

21. No development in any phase shall commence until details of proposed

arrangements for future management and maintenance of the proposed streets within the site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Following occupation of the first dwelling on the site, the

streets shall be maintained in accordance with the approved management and maintenance details. Reasons: To ensure estate streets serving the development are completed in the interests of residential amenity and highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

22. The development of each phase shall not be occupied until details of cycle parking for that phase have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved cycle parking for that phase shall be implemented before the development is occupied. Thereafter, the cycle parking shall be retained in accordance with the approved details and shall be kept available for the parking of cycles at all times. Reason: In the interests of highway safety and sustainable development, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

23. The development shall not be occupied until details of a Framework Travel Plan

in respect of the application site have been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. At all times thereafter the approved Framework Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. This Framework Travel Plan must include:

i. the contact details of a suitably qualified Travel Plan Co-ordinator;

ii. an implementation programme;

iii. an on-site assessment including details of transport links to the site, on-site facilities and any transport issues and problems;

iv. clearly defined aims and objectives in relation to travel modes; and

v. clearly defined senior management and staff responsibilities and roles in the implementation of the Framework Travel Plan.

Reason: In the interests of Sustainable Development, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

24. Twelve months after first occupation of the development details of a Full Travel Plan shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. At all times thereafter the approved Full Travel Plan shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details. This Full Travel Plan must include:

i. details of and results from an initial residents survey;

ii. clearly specified targets for resident travel mode shares;

iii. a plan for monitoring and reviewing the effectiveness of the Full Travel Plan; and

iv. a scheme providing for a biennial monitoring report until completion of the development to be submitted to the Local Planning Authority regarding the implementation of the Full Travel Plan.

Reason: In the interests of Sustainable Development, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework

25. No development shall commence on a phase until details of the materials to be

used in the construction of the external surfaces of streets, paths, recreational paths, private drives, driveways and car parking areas for that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The development of that phase shall be carried out in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In the interests of visual amenity, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

26. Prior to occupation of the 50th dwelling on site, details of the proposed highway works on Town Centre junctions shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The highways work shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plans and fully operational prior to the occupation of the 75th dwelling to be served from that junction. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework

27. Prior to first occupation of the development, details of the proposed vehicular access control and/ or access arrangements at Elm Road shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Within 12 months of first occupation the approved highway works shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

28. Prior to first occupation of the development, details of a pedestrian crossing point on Ponteland Road which will include a refuge island and dropped kerb shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Within 12 months of first occupation the approved highway works shall be constructed in accordance with the approved plans. Reason: In the interests of highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

29. Prior to occupation of each phase, details of surface water drainage to manage runoff from private land shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved surface water drainage scheme shall be implemented in accordance with the approved details before first occupation of that phase and thereafter maintained in accordance with the approved details. Reason: In order to prevent surface water run off in the interests of the amenity of the area and to ensure suitable drainage has been investigated for the development and implemented, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

30. No development in any phase shall be occupied until details of the external lighting of the buildings and external areas of that phase have been submitted to

and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The approved details shall be implemented before the development within that phase is occupied and retained as such thereafter. Reason: In the interests of amenity and highway safety, in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

31. Prior to commencement of each phase of development a scheme to dispose of surface water from the development shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. This scheme shall:

i. Restrict discharge from the development to 4.39 l/s/ha for all rainfall

events, unless otherwise approved in writing by the lead local flood authority and the local planning authority.

ii. On site drainage shall be split in two catchment (north and south) as is outlined within the drainage strategy.

iii. Adhere to the general principles as set out in the flood risk assessment and drainage strategy from Patrick Parsons reference N12052 Revision 2 and drawing number N12052-201 Revision P2 'Preliminary surface water and foul water Drainage Strategy'.

iv. Provide attenuation on site for the 1 in 100 year plus climate change event, including an allowance for urban creep.

v. Incorporate sustainable drainage techniques throughout the development wherever possible and practicable.

Reason: To ensure the effective disposal of surface water from the development by not increasing the risk of flooding elsewhere, having regard to the NPPF.

32. All SuDS attenuation features shall be positioned outside the 1 in 1000 year flood extent from the Fairney Burn and river Pont.

Reason: To ensure full capacity of attenuation features at all times and to ensure the risk of flooding does not increase elsewhere.

33. Prior to first occupation of each phase of the development details of the adoption

and maintenance of all SuDS features shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. A maintenance schedule which includes details for all SuDS features for the lifetime of development shall be comprised within and be implemented forthwith in perpetuity.

Reason: To ensure that the scheme to disposal of surface water operates at its full potential throughout the development's lifetime.

34. Details of the disposal of surface water from the development through each construction phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure the effective disposal of surface water across the development and to ensure the risk of flooding does not increase during this phase and to limit the siltation of any on site surface water features and downstream.

35. Prior to the commencement of any development in each phase, a detailed scheme for the disposal of foul water from that phase must be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority in consultation with Northumbrian Water. Thereafter the development of that phase shall take place in full accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure a suitable scheme to deal with foul water is provided and incorporated into the scheme from the earliest opportunity.

36. Notwithstanding the approved plans, the proposed flood alleviation scheme in the form of SUDS ponds/basins and swales, should be designed in accordance with aerodrome safeguarding best practices and shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority, in consultation with Newcastle International Airport prior to comment of development. Reason: In the interests of aerodrome safeguarding and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework.

37. A programme of archaeological work is required in accordance with the brief provided by Northumberland Conservation (dated 7/2/2017). The archaeological scheme shall comprise three stages of work. Each stage shall be completed and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority before it can be discharged.

i. No development or archaeological mitigation shall commence on site

until a written scheme of investigation based on the brief has been submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

ii. The archaeological recording scheme required by the brief must be completed in accordance with the approved written scheme of investigation.

iii. The programme of analysis, reporting, publication and archiving if required by the brief must be completed in accordance with the approved written scheme of investigation.

Reason: The site is of archaeological interest and in accordance with the National Planning Policy Framework and National Planning Practice Guidance.

38. No development shall commence on site until a Method Statement for fencing,

vehicular access and storage of material in the two archaeological excavation areas (highlighted in blue on the attached plan) has been submitted and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. The fencing, vehicular access and storage of material in each area shall be maintained in accordance with the approved method statement until the archaeological excavation is completed in that area.

Reason: To ensure that the defined areas of archaeological interest are not subject to damage or truncation until the archaeological excavation of these areas has been completed.

39. The existing trees and hedges on the site shall be retained and shall not be

felled, lopped or topped without the written consent of the Local Planning Authority. Any trees removed without such consent or dying or being severely damaged or becoming seriously diseased shall be replaced in the same position

with trees of the same species and, as nearly as possible, of the same maturity as those removed having regard for current arboricultural practice.

Reason: To ensure protection of existing trees and hedges which are not required for removal as part of the development.

40. Prior to the commencement of development, a veteran tree management plan for T28, T29, T30, T35 and T39, as identified on the report, “Tree report at West Clickemin Farm” (AJT, Nov 2016) shall be submitted to the LPA for its written approval. The scheme shall document measures to protect and retain veteran trees, protect property and risk of harm to people, including by the use of fenced off areas, arboricultural work, the retention of deadwood at the site, post storm monitoring as well as annual monitoring. Once approved in writing the scheme shall be implemented for a period of not less than 20 years. Reason: to protect and conserve veteran trees in accordance with paragraph 118 of the NPPF.

41. Prior to the commencement of development on each phase, a scheme for the installation of any permanent and temporary external lighting on that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing with the LPA. The lighting scheme should be designed so that lighting levels are minimised in accordance with the document Bats and Lighting in the UK, Institute of Lighting Engineers and BCT, 2009. The approved scheme shall be implemented in full prior to the dwellings being occupied. Reason: to prevent the risk of harm to protected species from the outset of the development.

42. No development shall be carried out other than in accordance with the guidance set out in Pollution Prevention Guidance: Works or Maintenance in or Near Water PPG5, Environment Agency, 2007. Reason: To ensure that a watercourse is not polluted or contaminated during development works.

43. No vegetation clearance shall be undertaken between 1 March and 31 August

unless an ecologist has first confirmed that no birds nests that are being built or are in use, eggs or dependent young will be damaged or destroyed. Reason: To protect nesting birds, all species of which are protected by law.

44. Prior to commencement of development of each phase, a biodiversity management plan shall be submitted to approved by the local planning authority. This should include details of: all grass seed mixtures, shrubs and trees to be sown and planted, including the SUDs area, establishment methods to be employed to successfully establish grasslands, woodlands and hedgerows; ongoing management to be carried out, including cutting, pruning, trimming, weed control, litter picking and replanting; bird nesting provision, including the location, height, orientation, numbers and specification of bird nesting provision (No fewer than 20 tree mounted bird boxes and 20 bird boxes integrated into the fabric of the buildings shall be installed); bat roost provision, including the location, height, orientation, numbers and specification of nesting provision (No

fewer than 20 tree mounted bat boxes and 20 bat boxes integrated into the fabric of the buildings shall be installed); and a programme of ecological monitoring.

Once approved the site should be managed in full accordance with the scheme for a period of not less than 10 years.

Reason: to conserve and enhance the biodiversity of the site and local area in accordance with the NPPF.

45. All trenches and excavations deeper than 0.30m left open overnight should have a ramp installed at an angle of no more than 45 degrees to allow the escape of entrapped mammals and gaps shall be created and retained in all boundary fences between dwellings to allow the passage of small mammals such as hedgehog. Gaps shall measure no less than 13cm by 13cm.

Reason: to enhance the biodiversity of the site for a UK BAP priority species

46. No development shall commence on each phase until written agreement is obtained from the Local Planning Authority regarding those trees, shrubs and hedges which shall be retained. These shall be properly fenced off from those parts of the land to be developed and shall remain so protected, as approved by the said Authority, until the cessation of building works. Details of this fencing shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority.

Reason: To ensure protection of existing trees and hedges which are not required for removal as part of the development

47. No development will take place unless in accordance with the recommendations of the following ecological reports:

Phase One Habitat Survey October 2016 by BSG – paragraphs 4.24 to 4.28

Bat Activity Survey Report November 2016 by BSG – paragraph 4.8

Breeding Bird Survey Report November 2016 by BSG – paragraphs 4.13 to 4.19-

Reason: To encourage the creation of habitat which is favourable for various species.

48. No development shall take place until a scheme for the provision and management of a buffer zone alongside the watercourse shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the local planning authority. Thereafter the development shall be carried out in accordance with the approved scheme and any subsequent amendments shall be approved in writing with the local planning authority. The buffer zone scheme shall be free from built development including lighting, domestic gardens and formal landscaping; and could form a vital part of green infrastructure provision. The schemes shall include:

i. plans showing the extent and layout of the buffer zone ii. details of any proposed planting scheme (for example, native species) iii. details demonstrating how the buffer zone will be protected during

development and managed/maintained over the longer term including adequate financial provision and named body responsible for management plus production of detailed management plan

iv. details of any proposed footpaths, fencing, lighting etc.

Reason: Development that encroaches on watercourses has a potentially severe impact on their ecological value. Land alongside watercourses is particularly valuable for wildlife and it is essential this is protected.

49. Prior to the occupation of any dwellings within each phase a detailed scheme for

the maintenance and management of all areas of open space (including play equipment) within that phase shall be submitted to and approved in writing by the Local Planning Authority. Details to be submitted shall include;

i. Details of landscape management and maintenance plans ii. Details of planting, grass cutting, weeding and pruning iii. Inspection, repair and maintenance of all hard landscaping and

structures iv. Management, monitoring and operational restrictions v. Maintenance and planting replacement programme for the

establishment period of landscaping vi. Establish a procedure that would be implemented in the event of any

tree (or item of soft landscaping) being removed, uprooted/ destroyed or dying

The development must be carried out in full accordance with the approved details.

Reason: To ensure appropriate maintenance and management of open space Informatives Section 278 Agreement and works in adopted highway You are advised that offsite highway works required in connection with this permission are under the control of the Council’s Technical Services Division and will require an agreement under section 278 of the Highway Act 1980. These works should be carried out before first occupation of the development. All such works will be undertaken by the Council at the applicant’s expense. You should contact Highway Development Management at highwaysplanning@northumberland.gov.uk to progress this matter. Highway condition survey You should note that a highway condition survey should be carried out before the commencement of construction vehicle movements from this site. To arrange a survey contact Highway Development Management at highwaysplanning@northumberland. Reminder to not store building material or equipment on the highway Building materials or equipment shall not be stored on the highway unless otherwise approved. You are advised to contact the Streetworks team on 0345 600 6400 for Skips and Containers licences Contact Lighting Section You are advised to contact the Councils Lighting Section on HighwaysStreetLighting@northumberland.gov.uk before and during the construction

period with respect of street lighting to ensure sufficient illumination levels of the public highway. Contact Local Highway Authority - Estate Street Phasing and Completion Plan The applicant is advised to obtain the written approval of the Local Highway Authority for the details required under condition [insert], prior to the submission of such details to the Local Planning Authority in seeking to discharge the said condition. Such details, as may be submitted to the Local Highway Authority, could be subject to technical and safety assessments / audits, which may result in changes to the layouts and alignments as shown on any indicative layout(s) approved by virtue of the planning permission. The applicant is advised that the Local Planning Authority may reject details submitted to them for the discharge of the condition without evidence of technical approval from the Local Highway Authority. You can contact the Highway Development Management at highwaysplanning@northumberland.gov.uk Contact Local Highway Authority - Management and Maintenance of Estate Streets The applicant is advised that to discharge condition [insert] the Local Planning Authority requires a copy of a completed agreement between the applicant and the Local Highway Authority under Section 38 of the Highways Act 1980 or the constitution and details of a Private Management and Maintenance Company confirming funding, management and maintenance regimes. You can contact Highway Development Management at highwaysplanning@northumberland.gov.uk Reminder to not deposit mud/ debris/rubbish on the highway In accordance with the Highways Act 1980 mud, debris or rubbish shall not be deposited on the highway Road Safety Audits You should note that Road Safety Audits are required to be undertaken. Northumberland County Council offer this service. You should contact highwaysplanning@northumberland.gov.uk or 01670 622979 Section 38 Agreement and adoption of highways You are advised to contact the Council’s Highway Development Management team at highwaysplanning@northumberland.gov.uk concerning the need for a Section 38 Agreement of the Highway Act 1980 relating to the adoption of new highways. Date of Report: 06.03.2017 Background Papers: Planning application file(s) 16/04408/OUT