Stoke-On-Trent City Council and Newcastle-Under-Lyme Borough Council

Stoke-on-Trent City Council and Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council

Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment

Methodology July 2017

Contents

Foreword 4

1.0 Introduction & Background 5 Policy Context 5 Purpose of the Assessment 6 Partnership Approach 7 Outputs 7 Timetable 8

2.0 Methodology 9 Assessment Methodology 10 Stage 1 – Identification of Sites/ Broad Locations 10 Determining the Assessment Area & Site Size 10 Small Site Allowance 10 Desktop Review of Existing Data 11 Call for Sites - Suggesting a Potential Housing Site to the Councils 11 Carrying out the Survey/ Site Assessment 11

3.0 Detailed Methodology 13 Stage 2 – Site/ Broad Location Assessment 13 Estimating the Development Potential 13 Developable area assumptions 13 Density Assumptions 14 Lead-in Times and Build-Out Rates 19 Assessing the Suitability of Sites for Housing 20 Suitability Assumptions 20 Assessing a Sites Availability 24 Assessing a Sites Achievability 25 Overcoming Constraints 26 Stage 3 – Windfall Assessment 26 Stage 4 – Assessment Review 26 Stage 5 – Final Evidence Base 27 Implementation of the Methodology 28

Appendices 29

Appendix A - Newcastle-under-Lyme SHLAA site assessment pro-forma 29 Appendix B – Stoke-on-Trent SHLAA site assessment pro-forma 32 Appendix C – Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent Joint Local Plan Call for Sites Response Form 35

4.0 Glossary 42

Foreword

Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council and Stoke-on-Trent City Council are preparing a new Joint Local Plan. A key piece of evidence to support the production of the Joint Local Plan is the Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (SHLAA) which provides details of sites within the area and assesses whether they have development potential. This methodology has been developed by both councils and will be used to prepare separate consistent SHLAAs for each council. These will then form a key piece of evidence in the production of the Joint Local Plan.

If you would like any further information in relation to the SHLAA or wider Joint Local Plan programme, please find below the contact details for both authorities.

City of Stoke-on-Trent Council

Planning and Transportation Policy Civic Centre Glebe Street Stoke-on-Trent ST4 1HH Email: [email protected] Telephone: 01782 236339 Website: www.stoke.gov.uk/planningpolicy

Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council

Planning Policy Regeneration and Development Civic Offices Merrial Street Newcastle-under-Lyme ST5 2AG Email: [email protected] Telephone: 01782 742408 Website: http://www.newcastle-staffs.gov.uk/planningpolicy

1.0 Introduction & Background

1.1 Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council and Stoke-on-Trent City Council have started to prepare a Local Plan in partnership. The Joint Local Plan will identify how much new land is required to supply our communities development needs over the next 15 to 20 years, and in which locations, to help ensure sustainable economic growth is achieved.

1.2 The SHLAA aims to provide details of sites in each local authority area which may have the potential to meet the housing needs across the housing market area (HMA), which will be set out in the Joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA). This is required by national planning policy.

1.3 The primary role of the assessment is firstly to identify sites and broad locations for development and then secondly, to assess whether they are suitable, available and achievable for housing development and the likelihood of potential development sites coming forward. This assessment will inform whether the councils have enough land to meet their future housing needs. Each SHLAA document and subsequent update will therefore provide an important evidence base of the plan area’s potential capacity to accommodate new housing and will be used to inform the development of the Joint Local Plan strategy.

1.4 Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council and Stoke-on-Trent City Council are preparing separate SHLAAs, but have worked together to prepare a joint methodology so that there is a robust and consistent approach to this assessment of future land supply across the housing market area (HMA).

1.5 This report aims to set out the methodology which will be used to guide the technical assessment of sites to be considered in each council’s respective SHLAA.

Policy Context

1.6 Planning policies, designations and allocations of land within Newcastle- under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent are currently set by the joint Core Spatial Strategy 2006-2026 and the remaining saved policies of the Newcastle- under-Lyme Local Plan 2011 and the Stoke-on-Trent City Plan 2001. All of these existing development plan documents were adopted prior to the publication of the NPPF.

1.7 In order to ensure that planning policies for both areas are up to date and are fully compliant with the requirements of the NPPF and the supporting Planning Practice Guidance (PPG), both authorities have resolved1 to work jointly on a new Local Plan which will cover both Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent. As well as setting the broad development strategy for the two

1 Resolved at Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council Cabinet meeting on 16th October 2013 and Stoke-on- Trent City Council Cabinet meeting on 19th December 2013.

areas, this new plan will also contain detailed policies, designations and allocations of land for specific uses such as residential and employment development.

1.8 Details for the production of the new Joint Local Plan are available on either of the council websites: www.newcastle-staffs.gov.uk/planningpolicyand www.stoke.gov.uk/planningpolicy.

1.9 The SHLAA will be a key evidence document which will inform the development strategy i.e. spatial options and land allocations for new housing development within the new plan.

Purpose of the Assessment

1.10 The SHLAA aims to provide details of sites and broad locations within each council area and assess whether they have development potential which will help the councils to proactively plan for those sites to go forward in the Joint Local Plan and help to meet the OAN across the housing market area. Both councils’ respective SHLAAs will also be used to inform a five year supply of housing land for each council.

1.11 The primary role of the assessment should therefore identify sites and broad locations of development, assess development potential and assess individual sites in terms of their suitability for development and the likelihood of development coming forward.

1.12 The PPG is clear that the SHLAA forms a key component of the evidence to underpin policies in the development plan for housing and economic regeneration, including supporting the delivery of land to meet identified need for these uses.

Whilst the SHLAA provides a robust mechanism to help identify a potential future supply of housing land which is suitable, available and achievable, the SHLAA will not itself allocate land for residential use, and sites identified in the SHLAA will not automatically come forward, or be guaranteed planning permission. Likewise, if sites are ruled out through the SHLAA process this

does not prevent a planning application being submitted on the site. Any applications for planning permission to develop sites would be considered against the most up to date national and local planning policies, together with all material planning considerations. Any proposals to allocate sites will be subject to extensive consultation in line with the Joint Statement of Community Involvement (Adopted 2015)

Partnership Approach

1.13 Stoke-on-Trent City Council and Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council have developed a joint methodology to guide the preparation of each council’s respective SHLAA. This reflects PPG, which requires the SHLAA assessment to be undertaken on a regular basis working with other planning authorities in the relevant housing market area or functional economic area. Furthermore, there are clear guidelines that recommend that local planning authorities engage with stakeholders from the earliest stages of plan preparation which includes the evidence base in relation to land availability.

1.14 As part of fostering a positive and proactive relationship with the development industry, Stoke-on-Trent City Council and Newcastle-under-Lyme Borough Council undertook targeted consultation with landowners, developers, agents and relevant organisations on a draft version of this methodology paper from 14th October to 4th November 2015. The comments received have been considered in preparing this final methodology document, which sets out the parameters to be used to complete each council’s respective SHLAA. The councils will also consider any future comments received on the SHLAAs themselves once they have been published.

Outputs

1.15 To ensure that the outputs of the study are consistent with the PPG each council’s SHLAA will deliver the following outputs.

 A list of all sites or broad locations considered, cross-referenced to their locations on maps,

 An assessment of each site or broad location,  Details of those sites which are considered to be realistic candidates for development (Residential land supply in years 0-5 (deliverable), 6-10 (developable), 11-15 (developable) and sites currently considered to not to be developable – due to constraints (availability, viability/ suitability – these may be sites where further investigation is required in order to ascertain whether the constraints can be overcome and therefore for the site to become developable)

 The potential type and quantity of development that could be delivered on each site/broad location, including a reasonable estimate of build out rates, setting out how any barriers to delivery could be overcome and when,

 An indicative trajectory of anticipated development and consideration of associated risks.

Timetable

1.16 It is anticipated that both councils will publish their respective SHLAAs later in 2017, to provide the evidence on housing land supply to inform the development of the Joint Local Plan Strategic Options consultation document. The SHLAA is subject to periodic review and assessments will be updated accordingly.

2.0 Methodology

2.1 The methodology has been prepared in accordance with the PPG. This is illustrated in the diagram below.

Assessment Methodology

Stage 1 – Identification of Sites/ Broad Locations

Determining the Assessment Area & Site Size

2.2 The PPG is clear that the geographical area that should be considered as part of the SHLAA assessment should relate to the Housing Market Area (HMA) and Functional Economic Market Area (FEMA). The Newcastle-under- Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA) identifies that the two authorities form a single HMA for the purposes of identifying and meeting housing need and therefore this geographical area forms a robust basis in which to base the respective SHLAA assessments. The two authorities have therefore created a consistent methodology to be used in identifying and assessing the capacity of deliverable and developable housing sites and this will allow a consistent assessment of housing land availability over the housing market area, as required by PPG.

2.3 All sites considered in previous SHLAAs have been carried forward in to this assessment. Both councils also ran a Call for Sites exercise in September and October 2014 to seek submissions of sites to be included in this assessment. Further sites have also been submitted to the Borough Council since then. Expired planning approvals for residential development have also been considered, as have sites included in other studies such as the Employment Land Review.

2.4 Once all potential sites have been collated, then a process of filtering begins in order to narrow down the number of sites that will be subject to more detailed assessment. As the first step, all sites without planning permission that fall within the Green Belt have not been included within the assessment.

Small Site Allowance

2.5 Each authority's SHLAA will assess all sites capable of delivering five or more dwellings, in line with the requirements of the PPG. Historically, sites of four dwellings or less have also made a significant contribution to each authority’s housing supply, with a significant number of planning permissions for smaller scale schemes coming forward. To account for the role such sites play in meeting housing need, a small sites allowance based on a desktop analysis of existing planning permissions and past implementation rates will be added for the 0-5 year period. This allowance will be based upon the number of planning permissions for sites of 1-4 dwellings in each local authority area, averaged out over the first 5 years of the SHLAA. Recognising that some of these permissions may not come forward, a non-implementation rate based upon historic planning permissions of sites of 1-4 dwellings will be applied to this supply.

Desktop Review of Existing Data

2.6 The PPG requires that plan makers should be proactive in identifying as wide a range as possible of sites and broad locations for development. Therefore, in considering sites which could form part of each council’s housing land supply, a variety of sources will be used to identify sites for assessment. These will primarily include:

 Previously submitted SHLAA sites without planning permission  Extant planning permissions yet to be completed or implemented  Expired planning permissions  Planning applications that have been refused or withdrawn.  Sites identified from the National Land Use Database  Land in local authority ownership (including Staffordshire County Council land)  Opportunities in established uses (such as sites identified as surplus to local needs through evidence-base studies including the joint Employment Land Review, Playing Pitch Strategies and Green Space/Open Space Strategies)  Desktop Review/Officer Site Visits

Call for Sites - Suggesting a Potential Housing Site to the Councils

2.7 In order to supplement sites from the above sources, both councils issued a Call for Sites between the 8th September 2014 and the 31st October 2014.

2.8 This exercise invited all members of the public to submit potential site options to the councils for assessment through the SHLAA process. All contacts on each council's consultation database were contacted as part of this exercise. The sites nominated have subsequently been added to the database and will be considered as part of the assessment. The “Call for Sites” process will remain open and therefore there will continue to be an opportunity to put sites forward at any point. Any sites put forward will be recorded and held in the database until the next SHLAA assessment. If you would like to suggest a new site for consideration or provide new information on a site already known to either council, please complete a Call for Sites submission form for the site and include a location plan. Further details and a Call for Sites form can be found on each of the respective council websites or in Appendix D of this document. The links to both Newcastle- under-Lyme borough Council and Stoke-on-Trent City Council websites can be found below:

www.newcastle-staffs.gov.uk/planningpolicy www.stoke.gov.uk/planningpolicy

Carrying out the Survey/ Site Assessment

2.9 In order to fully assess a site in terms of deliverability and developability, decisions will be based on the most up to date information available at the time of the assessment. To ensure that sites are assessed on a consistent

basis, pro-formas for each authority have been put together, which will be used to guide the collection of data.

2.10 The pro-formas, which are available in Appendices A & B of this document, were put together drawing on key requirements of the PPG and including:

 Site Name  Site Boundary/ size  Surrounding Characteristics  Environmental Constraints  Physical Constraints  Development potential

3.0 Detailed Methodology

Stage 2 – Site/ Broad Location Assessment

Estimating the Development Potential

3.1 Below are the proposed assumptions to be used in assessing the development potential of proposed SHLAA sites based on a desktop analysis by officers. These assumptions are intended only as a starting point for estimating capacity and site delivery timescales, and will be superseded by more appropriate site specific information where this is available. The intention is also to commission external consultants to examine the likely financial viability of SHLAA sites. Any advice given by the appointed consultants on these assumptions will be taken into account in preparing each council’s SHLAA. There will be further opportunities for stakeholders to comment on the SHLAAs once they have been prepared.

Developable area assumptions

Stoke City Council Developable area Site Size Proportion of site for Area of site for (Hectares) associated infrastructure housing Up to 0.5 5% 95% 0.5-2 20% 80% 2+ 30% 70%

3.2 Below are the assumptions to be used where no site specific information is available to guide assessment of the proportion of a site required for associated infrastructure. These assumptions reflect the fact that larger sites may need to provide a portion of land for necessary infrastructure, such as open space and community facilities, which may not be reflected in average density assumptions. Therefore, in the absence of more detailed information, the councils will use the following presumptions as a starting point to determine how much of a site’s area could accommodate housing development.

3.3 Officers will also consider the sites on an individual basis to determine an appropriate developable area in arriving at a judgement as to the appropriate developable area.

Newcastle Council Developable area Site Size Proportion of site for Area of site for (Hectares) associated infrastructure housing Up to 0.5 5% 95% 0.5-2 15% 85% 2+ 20% 80%

3.4 The tables above contain different developable areas following an assessment of planning permissions by Stoke on Trent City Council which indicated a different developable area should apply to this area.

Density Assumptions

3.5 The assumptions to be used to guide assessment of potential capacity per hectare are set out below for each authority. These density assumptions will be used alongside officer judgement on site specific constraints and developable area assumptions to determine site capacity.

3.6 The PPG requires that, in the absence of an up-to-date plan policy on density, relevant existing development schemes can be used as a basis for assessment. The councils have therefore determined housing densities using historic data on completed schemes and extant planning permissions of 5 or more dwellings from various sub-areas. This is to ensure that these assumptions are based upon site densities which were deliverable and considered to be suitable in the context of the area. These sub-areas are derived from the joint Strategic Housing Market Assessment.

3.7 Officers may also consider factors such as density and character of the immediate area surrounding a site and any other site specific characteristics in arriving at a judgement as to the appropriate site density.

3.8 In Newcastle-under-Lyme, Town Ward has been split apart from the rest of the Central area, to ensure the higher density nature of this ward is appropriately considered. This largely reflects completions of apartments within or surrounding the town centre. However, there are also locations within the Town ward where high density apartment developments would not appropriately reflect the character of the surrounding area. In these cases a lower density of 50.d.p.h. will be applied as a starting point to reflect the character of the wider Central sub-market area.

Newcastle-under-Lyme

Areas Wards Density Assumptions for the SHLAA (Dwellings per hectare) Audley and Rural North Audley and Bignall End and 30 Halmerend wards Central May Bank, Cross Heath, 50 Wolstanton, Porthill, Bradwell, Chesterton, Holditch, Knutton and Silverdale, Silverdale and Parksite Central Town Ward 180 dwellings per hectare or 50 dwellings per hectare Clayton Clayton, Seabridge, 40

Areas Wards Density Assumptions for the SHLAA (Dwellings per hectare) Westlands and Thistleberry Wards Keele - 20 (Keele Ward): Kidsgrove and Talke (Talke, Butt Lane, 40 Ravenscliffe, Kidsgrove and Newchapel Wards): Madeley Madeley Ward 30 Rural South Loggerheads and Whitmore 20 Ward

Stoke-on-Trent

3.9 In Stoke-on-Trent density completions and commitments data has been considered for sites of 5 or more dwellings and translated into an average density for each ward. Eaton Park, Meir Hay, Meir Park and Sneyd Green have limited data available to inform density assumptions and therefore the assumptions set out in the Core Spatial Strategy have been applied.

Density Assumption for Ward SHLAA (Dwellings per hectare)

Abbey Hulton & Townsend Bentilee & Ubberley Blurton West & Newstead Goldenhill & Sandford Hanford & Trentham Little Chell & Stanfield 40 Meir North Weston Coyney Eaton Park Meir Hay Meir Park Sneyd Green Baddeley, Milton & Norton Bradeley & Chell Heath Fenton West & Mount Pleasant Ford Green & Smallthorne 50 Great Chell & Packmoor Meir South Blurton East Burslem Central Burslem Park Lightwood North & Normacot Penkhull & Stoke 70 Sandford Hill Tunstall

Density Assumption for Ward SHLAA (Dwellings per hectare)

Boothen & Oakhill Etruria & Hanley Hartshill & Basford 90 Moorcroft Broadway & Longton East Birches Head & Central Park Dresden & Florence Fenton East Hanley Park & Shelton 100 Hollybush & Longton West Joiner's Square Springfields & Trent Vale

Lead-in Times and Build-Out Rates

3.10 The assumptions set out in the tables below will be applied from the anticipated date of site commencement to determine site delivery timescales where no site specific information is available to guide judgements on when sites will be delivered. These are intended only as a starting point for estimating delivery timescales and where more appropriate site-specific information is available, this will be used instead.

3.11 In determining the indicative lead-in times and build-out rates set out below, ten years of historic monitoring data (from 2004/05 to 2013/14) was considered for all completed sites which delivered 5 or more dwellings. Sites were counted based upon the year they were completed within.

3.12 This historic monitoring period was chosen to reflect both a period of housing market growth and recession, to offer a balanced picture of past housing market trends and to reflect the influence that the strength of the local housing market may have had on lead-in times and build-out rates on sites.

3.13 This ten year historic period was used to establish average build-out rates on sites of a variety of sizes, by measuring the time from site commencement to completion. Information was also split by completed site capacity to recognise that the scale of a proposed scheme may affect build out-rates on a site. The site size thresholds used have been chosen to ensure that rates are based on average build-out rates across a large sample of sites, to avoid single sites skewing these figures.

3.14 For lead in-times, the ten year historic period was used to establish average timescales from a site gaining planning approval to commencement on site. Where sites are yet to receive full planning permission, an additional 12 month lead-in time has also been assumed to reflect the time taken to prepare for and to obtain planning permission.

Newcastle-under-Lyme & Stoke-on-Trent – Site build-out rates

Sites of 50 dwellings 30 dwellings per annum or more Sites of 16-49 20 dwellings per annum dwellings Sites of 5-15 5 dwellings per annum dwellings Newcastle-under- Site lead in time Lyme & Stoke-on- Trent With full planning 12 months permission With outline planning 24 months permission

Assessing the Suitability of Sites for Housing

3.15 The PPG sets out that when assessing the suitability of a site consideration should be given to the needs of the community. This may include, although not be limited to the provision of market housing, private rented, affordable housing, people wishing to build their own homes, housing for older people and for economic development uses.

3.16 In order to assess the suitability of a site for development a number of considerations should be taken into account including:

 the development plan, emerging plan policy and national policy;  market and industry requirements in that housing market or functional economic market area.

3.17 Taking the above into account, all available information will be considered to establish the potential for suitability constraints on a site. This will then inform a judgement as to whether the site falls into one of three categories:

 Suitable- Sites which are free from suitability constraints, or where there is clear evidence that constraints can be overcome.  Potentially suitable (constrained) - Sites which may be constrained by suitability considerations, but where mitigation measures may be possible, enabling constraints to be overcome. These sites will not be considered suitable for inclusion in the 0-5 year supply until it can be demonstrated that these constraints can be mitigated or removed.  Unsuitable- Sites with significant suitability constraints, which are unlikely to be overcome through mitigation without a review of assessment criteria (e.g. sites within Flood Zone 3 or a Green Belt designation).

3.18 It should be noted that a judgement on a site’s suitability may be subject to change as new evidence emerges.

3.19 In order to understand the suitability of individual sites each council has prepared a site pro-forma which sets out the criteria that each site will be assessed against. These can be found in Appendix A and Appendix B.

Suitability Assumptions

3.20 When assessing sites suitability a number of assumptions are applied in order to determine individual site suitability. These are set out below. Equally, there may be as yet unidentified constraints relating to housing sites which will have to be considered in assessing their suitability for development once clear evidence of a constraint becomes apparent. Sites which have an extant planning permission for a residential use will be considered suitable, in accordance with the PPG.

3.21 Development Plan policies (including Green Belt) – The councils are currently reviewing their existing Development Plan policies through the

preparation of the Joint Local Plan. Therefore, sites will be assessed against existing Development Plan policies from the Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent Core Spatial Strategy (2009) and Saved Policies of the Newcastle-under-Lyme Local Plan (adopted 2003) and the City Plan (2001). Sites within the Green Belt will be considered ‘unsuitable’, and will only be reconsidered if exceptional circumstances are demonstrated through the preparation of the Joint Local Plan, in line with the requirements of paragraph 83 of the NPPF.

3.22 Sites required for other uses – Sites that are assessed as part of other evidence base documents, such as the Employment Land Review, Green / Open Space Strategy or Playing Pitch Strategy will be considered ‘unsuitable’ where there is a clear up-to-date requirement to keep the site for another use. Where this evidence requires updating or is subject to review, sites will be considered ‘potentially suitable’.

3.23 Contaminated Land– Contaminated land is a challenge in many parts of the two local authority areas. Potential constraints with regards land contamination will be established in consultation with the environmental health teams of the respective councils and any other relevant stakeholders, such as the Environment Agency. In most cases the key issue is not whether a site can be adequately remediated but instead whether it can be done so viably. The decision therefore to deem a site ‘unsuitable’ or ‘potentially suitable’ due to contamination should not be made unless there is site- specific information which indicates that remediation is unlikely to be able to make a site suitable.

3.24 Land Stability - Potential constraints with regards to ground stability will be established primarily through use of the Coal Authority’s Development High Risk areas. However, it is recognised that such constraints can usually be overcome and therefore sites in Development High Risk areas may be considered ‘suitable’ at this stage, subject to further detailed consideration at the site allocation or planning application stage.

3.25 Amenity Impacts- Where site specific information indicates that development on site would be affected by significant amenity constraints, the site will be deemed ‘potentially suitable’. Examples of such constraints may include being adjacent to an active landfill site or being within a Health and Safety Executive consultation zone. Please note that the loss of property value or loss of a view are not material planning considerations and as such cannot be taken into account.

3.26 Flood Risk – Inappropriate development in areas of high flood risk should be avoided by directing development away from areas of highest risk, but where development is necessary then it will need to be made safe from flood risk and also without increasing flood risk elsewhere. Taking the above considerations into account, the SHLAA will apply the assumptions below. Until up-to-date Strategic Flood Risk Assessments are prepared to establish

the extent of Flood Zone 3b, judgements will be made based upon Environment Agency Flood Zone mapping, which does not differentiate between Flood Zones 3a or 3b. Therefore, a precautionary principle that sites in Flood Zone 3 should be treated as ‘unsuitable’ will be used. Where sites are only partially within Flood Zones 2 & 3, the area of the site will be reduced to locate development outside of these areas.

 Environment Agency Flood Zone 1 – ‘Suitable’  Environment Agency Flood Zone 2 – ‘Potentially suitable’ i.e. constrained until an acceptable Flood Risk Assessment is produced  Environment Agency Flood Zone 3 – ‘Unsuitable’ 3.27 Historic Environment – A positive strategy should be promoted to conserve and enhance the historic environment. Where a potential development site would lead to substantial harm or total loss of a designated heritage asset the site should be deemed unsuitable. The assessment however will consider whether a listed building could be considered for alternative uses i.e. the conversion to residential. Taking into account the above considerations, development on the following sites would be deemed as ‘unsuitable’:

. Scheduled Ancient Monuments, . Registered Battlefields . Registered Parks and Gardens . Grade 1 and Grade II listed buildings (sites may be able to design round such assets, but loss should be wholly exceptional)

The assessment will also consider the proximity of sites to nearby heritage assets other designated and non-designated areas and structures, such as conservation areas and buildings on the local list. If, based on these considerations, officers judge the degree of harm caused by the development of a site to raise a constraint, then the site will be deemed ‘potentially suitable’.

3.28 Natural Environment – Development on the following sites are suggested as being classified as ‘unsuitable’:

 European designated and Ramsar - including potential Special Protection Areas and Special Protection Areas, and proposed Ramsar sites  Ancient woodland, Local Nature Reserves & Sites of Special Scientific Interest  Blanket Tree Preservation Order sites  Local Nature Reserves  Heavily wooded sites.  Regionally Important Geological Sites  Sites of Biological Interest and Biodiversity Alert Sites

3.29 It is recognised that sites may also potentially impact upon the natural environment due to their proximity to environmental designations. Expert advice and data (such as SSSI impact zones) will be used to indicate such potential impacts. Any constraints by proximity to natural sites will be recorded but will not lead to a site being considered ‘unsuitable’ or ‘potentially

suitable’ at this stage unless site specific information indicates that any potential impact is unlikely to be adequately addressed at a planning application/site allocation stage.

3.30 Access to Facilities – The councils will apply a number of measures to determine the accessibility of a site to essential facilities. Access to the following facilities will be considered:

 Primary, Secondary Schools and Further Education Colleges  Employment  Retail supermarkets  Local retail opportunities  GPs/ Health Care  Post Office/ Health Centre  Bus stop with a regular service  Town Centre  Major public transport node  Publically accessible green space

3.31 An overall assessment of general accessibility will be considered by officers to determine whether the assessed site is considered ‘potentially suitable’. As a starting point, this will include use of an indicative threshold of 800 metres2 to measure access to facilities in the Stoke-on-Trent, Newcastle-under-Lyme and Kidsgrove urban areas. This measurement will be taken from the middle of each site to ensure a consistent approach. However, this threshold is only a starting point for considering accessibility, as whether a facility is within an acceptable walking distance will depend upon the type and size of facility provided and the quality of pedestrian links. Ultimately, whether or not a site is in an unsustainable location due to poor access to facilities will be determined by use of officer judgement on a case-by-case basis, rather than a set number of facilities being required within a certain distance.

3.32 Recognising that sustainable transport solutions differ between urban and rural areas, as set out in paragraph 29 of the National Planning Policy Framework, specific evidence will be prepared to consider access to facilities in Newcastle-under-Lyme’s rural area. Judgements will be made using evidence to be prepared in the council’s Housing Clarification Statement.

3.33 Highways Issues – Officer judgement will be used to make decisions on whether access constraints exist on sites. Where it is felt to be necessary, the councils will consult with each council’s relevant highways teams and Highways England where appropriate to establish any potential highways constraints associated with sites. More detailed discussions will be held prior to the allocation of any sites through the Joint Local Plan and ultimately if a

2 This is the acceptable distance for general facilities indicated in the Institution for Highways and Transportation’s ‘Guidelines for Providing for Journeys on Foot’ and is also consistent with the Government’s ‘Manual for Streets’ guidance, which indicates a ‘walkable’ neighbourhood has a range of facilities within 800m

planning application is submitted on a site, it will be subject to a detailed transport assessment if there is a highways constraint.

3.34 Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land – The best and most versatile agricultural land is defined as land in grades 1, 2 and 3a of the Agricultural Land Classification. The NPPF requires local planning authorities to take into account the economic and other benefits of such land and should seek to use areas of poorer quality land in preference to that of higher quality. It is therefore proposed that land in grades 1 and 2 of the Agricultural Land Classification should be constrained by this factor and deemed as ‘potentially suitable’.

Assessing a Sites Availability

3.35 Available information will be considered to establish whether a site is available for development. This will then inform a judgement as to whether the site falls into one of three categories:

 ‘Available now’- There are no known legal or physical barriers which would prevent immediate development on a site. Such sites may be considered ‘deliverable’, subject to an assessment of their suitability and achievability.  ‘Likely to become available’- There is a legal or physical barrier preventing immediate development on a site which is likely to be overcome.  ‘Unavailable’- The site has a clear legal or physical barrier preventing development on the site which is not likely to be overcome (e.g. an unwilling landowner)

3.36 For a site to be considered available for development, the PPG identifies that information should be obtained that confirms that there is confidence that there are no legal or ownership issues, ransom strips or operational requirements of landowners. This will often mean that a developer or landowner has expressed an intention to develop, or the landowner has expressed an intention to sell.

3.37 The decision therefore on whether a site is considered available with be reached considering the following:

 Whether the site is in active use  Whether the site could be developed now  Whether the site is free from ownership and tenancy issues  Whether there is an extant planning consent and if so whether it is in the process of being implemented.

3.38 If a site has extant planning permission and is in the process of being implemented, it will be considered to be available. Those sites that have an extant permission for an alternative use other than residential and are in the process of being implemented will be considered unavailable.

3.39 If a site has been directly nominated by the land owner or developer in control of the site then it will be assumed that the site is available. If this is the case

but the site is still in active use, the site will still be considered available unless there are known tenancy issues. If a site is in active use and hasn’t been put forward by a landowner or controlling developer, it is to be assumed that the site cannot be considered available at this time. It will be the landowners responsibility to keep the local authority updated of any changes affecting a sites availability.

3.40 ‘Suitable’ and ‘potentially suitable’ sites where availability is unclear will be subject to further investigation and officers will complete a land registry search to enable individual landowners to be contacted to determine availability.

3.41 The existence of a planning permission does not necessarily mean that the site is available. To take account of this, where an extant planning permission has been submitted on behalf of the sole landowner/all landowners on a site, it will be assumed that it is available for development. Where a planning application has not been submitted by all relevant landowners or has been put forward by a third party, further information will be sought to establish the site’s availability. The assessment will therefore need to draw on the expertise of the Development Management team, based on first-hand knowledge to understand whether there are any potential problems that would deem a site unavailable.

Assessing a Sites Achievability

3.42 Planning Practice Guidance suggests that in order for a site to be considered achievable for development there must be a reasonable prospect that the particular type of development will be developed on the site at a particular point in time. This is based on a judgement of economic viability and the capacity of the developer to complete, let or sell the development over a certain period.

3.43 The issue of achievability is essentially related to the viability of the development of a site for housing. This is known to be a major issue in Stoke- on-Trent in particular, and both Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent have housing markets which are significantly lower value than both the regional and national averages. The housing market has been weak for a number of years and the problems in the drop in house prices in the rest of the country have also hit Stoke-on-Trent. This coupled with many major development sites being on brownfield land with often significant contamination and remediation requirements, has often led to the granting of planning permission but without the housing ever actually being delivered. Both councils are therefore putting great emphasis on site viability in the SHLAA process.

3.44 In order to assess viability and deliverability, the councils are proposing to commission consultants to update existing evidence on viability so that this important issue can be considered in detail. Additional information regarding

viability and the assumptions applied to the methodology will be published to accompany the draft SHLAA. The sites will be considered in the context of land values and sale prices in Stoke-On-Trent and Newcastle-Under-Lyme.

3.45 In addition the following factors may also be considered to help achieve a decision on achievability:

 Whether there is active developer interest in the site?  Whether similar sites have been successfully developed in the preceding years?  Whether there are any abnormal development costs (identified through the viability study)

Overcoming Constraints

3.46 Where constraints are identified on a site which impact upon the suitability, availability or achievability of a site, the councils will consider what action would be needed to remove them as part of the local plans process. This may include the provision of new infrastructure, dealing with fragmented landownership, environmental improvement or a need to review development plan policy. This will also include a consideration of when and how such actions could be delivered.

Stage 3 – Windfall Assessment

3.47 Windfall sites are sites which have not been specifically identified as available in the Local Plan process. The PPG allows local authorities to identify a windfall site allowance in their 0-5 or 6-15 year supply where they have compelling evidence that such sites have consistently become available in the local area and will continue to provide a reliable source of supply. As the councils are seeking to fully identify as many site options as possible to inform their respective SHLAAs, a windfall allowance is not being proposed as part of this SHLAA methodology at this point in time. This will be kept under review and reconsidered in future land supply updates.

Stage 4 – Assessment Review

3.48 When the assessment of sites has been completed, the borough and city councils will produce separate SHLAA reports showing a housing trajectory and identifying what level of housing provision is likely to come forward to meet the objectively assessed needs of each authority. A decision will be made as to whether sufficient sites have been identified to meet these needs. If it is then determined that insufficient deliverable and developable sites have been identified, a review of assumptions made regarding the physical and policy constraints affecting sites will have to be undertaken. As part of this review, the councils will also consider whether there is a need to apply a non- implementation rate at this stage.

Stage 5 – Final Evidence Base

3.49 Each SHLAA will inform the plan-making process through providing an understanding of what type of land is available, where it is located, and when it may be developed. Please note that inclusion of a site within the SHLAA does not mean that it will be allocated for development or granted planning permission. The SHLAA is evidence base information for plan-making and Development Management. Allocation of land for development will be considered through work to produce a Joint Local Plan for Newcastle-under- Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent and will be subject to Sustainability Appraisal and further public consultation. Please see the respective councils’ websites for further information on work to produce a Joint Local Plan and timetable for doing this:

www.newcastle-staffs.gov.uk/planningpolicy www.stoke.gov.uk/planningpolicy

The final SHLAA will include:  Overall supply by type, location, years (0-5, 6-10, 11-15 and land not considered developable currently).  Assessment information for each site.

Implementation of the Methodology

3.50 The diagram below sets out the stages of assessment and how the conclusions from each site assessment will be derived. Each site will be subject to the same logical approach and will ensure that each assessment is completed consistently. The conclusions from the assessment will then potential draw a number of conclusions and will then inform both the deliverable (0 - 5 year) supply of sites and the developable supply of sites (6 – 10 and 11 – 15 years).

Identification of Assessment Sites

Regular Site Assessment

Sites now

Discount Stage complete

Detailed Site Assessment

Is the site Suitable or Potentially Suitable?

Yes The Site is No Unsuitable

Is the Site Available?

Yes No

Is the Site Is the Site Likely to Achievable? become available?

Yes Yes No No

Is the Site Achievable? The Site is suitable but is not available and unlikely to become available

Yes No

The site is suitable or The site is suitable or The site is suitable or The site is suitable, not potentially suitable, potentially suitable, available potentially suitable, not currently available and not available & achievable but not achievable currently available and achievable achievable

Deliverable Supply Developable Supply

0-5 years 6-10 Years 10-15 Years

Informs the 5 year Housing Informs the Local Plan Making Supply Process

Appendices

Appendix A - Newcastle-under-Lyme SHLAA site assessment pro-forma

Basic site information

Site Address Site reference Site Source Date of site assessment and any site visits Grid Reference Easting and northing Ward Parish (if applicable) Existing site use Previous site use(s) Land owner(s)/applicant Site promoter contact details Total site area (Ha) Developable site area (Ha) Current development Existing buildings to plan policy area be demolished on site Greenfield/Brownfield/Mi Site topography x (if mixture, indicate predominant use where possible)

Estimated development potential (dwellings) based on either density assumptions or developer correspondence

Comments on estimated development potential (indicate information relied upon)

Current development status (under construction/not started) Suitability assessment

Question Question Yes No Mayb Comments and reference e implications for deliverability SU1 Is the site likely to provide 5 or more dwellings? SU2 Does the site have planning permission?

SU3 Do current Development Plan policies indicate the site is unsuitable? SU4 Is there an evidenced need that a site should remain in another use (e.g. as demonstrated in the joint ELR review, Playing Pitch Strategy or Green Spaces Assessment)? SU5 Is the site isolated from existing settlements and facilities? SU6 Is the site within the Green Belt? SU7 Is the site within Flood Zone 2? SU8 Is the site within Flood Zone 3? SU9 Is there evidence of other flood risks on site SU10 Is the site within a heavily wooded area or an area of blanket TPOs? SU11 Does the site contain a designated AONB, SAC, RAMSAR, SPA, SSSI, Ancient Woodland, RIGS, SBI, LNR or BAS? SU12 What is the site’s Agricultural Land Classification?

SU13 What is the site’s Landscape Character Assessment classification? SU14 Does the site contain a designated heritage asset (e.g. listed buildings, conservation areas, SAMs)? SU15 Is the site within a Health and Safety Executive Major Hazard Consultation Zone? SU16 Is the site part of an Air Quality Management Area? SU17 Will the site create any adverse environmental or amenity impacts to occupiers or surrounding areas? SU18 Are there any known or potential highways/access issues which would prevent the development of the site? SU19 Is there any contamination on site?

SU20 Are there any physical constraints relating to ground stability or historic mining in or around the site? SU21 Do surrounding land uses make the site unsuitable for housing? SU22 Does the site have public transport access to essential services? SU23 Does the site have walking or cycling access to a range of essential services? SU24 Are there any other factors which would affect the site’s suitability? SU25 Is mitigation of physical and policy constraints potentially possible?

Yes No Comments Suitable now Potentially suitable with constraints Unsuitable Availability assessment

Question Question Yes No Mayb Comments and implications reference e for deliverability AV1 Does the site have a current planning permission submitted on behalf of the site owner? AV2 Has a willing landowner been identified on site? AV3 Is there any evidence of restrictive covenants on site? AV4 Does this site have a current use or tenancy which will need to cease or be relocated before development can commence? AV5 Is there any evidence to suggest any other legal issues which may affect a site’s availability (e.g. ransom strips)?

Yes No Comments Available now Likely to become available Unavailable Achievability assessment

Question Question Yes No Mayb Comments and implications reference e for deliverability AC1 Do viability assessments indicate the site is likely to be viable to develop? AC2 Is the site likely to be viable

subject to policy constraints being removed? AC3 Does correspondence with site promoter or internal council records indicate the site is likely to be achievable? Viability assessments will be used to determine the achievability of sites. However, where additional site specific evidence is available which indicates a site is achievable, this will also be used to inform judgements on the site’s achievability. Yes No Comments Achievable Unachievable

Appendix B – Stoke-on-Trent SHLAA site assessment pro-forma

Field Name Definition/ response Information SHLAA Land Av Reference Number Site Reference Data Source Description of where the site has come from – was it a suggestion through the Call for Sites etc. Site Address Ward Easting Northing Land Owner Agent Details Site Area (gross) Hectares Net Site Area Hectares Current use of site Former use of site Potential Capacity Number of dwellings See methodology for details Suitability Surrounding land uses/ Description of surrounding character of the area? land uses/ character of the area Site topography Is the site within the Green Yes/No Belt? Comments Green Belt Description of Green Belt status of land - links to is the site within the Green Belt question below. Is the site previously Yes/ No – (See NPPF developed? Annex 2 definition) Commitment Yes/No (Yes – sites with planning permission or under construction) Planning History Description of any relevant recent planning history. Windfall NPPF definition of windfall. Does the site fall within Flood Yes/No Zone 3? Does the site fall within Flood Yes/No Zone 2? Comments flood zones Description of flood risk - all or part of the site affected etc. Are there any potential surface Yes/No water issues? Comments surface water Description of surface water all or part of site affected etc. Is the site designated or  No allocated for another use?  Yes - Open Space (North Staffordshire Open Space)  Yes – Residential allocation  Yes – Employment allocation  Yes – Retail allocation Comments designation Explanation of designation or allocation - all or part of site affected Does the site impact on Yes/No cultural heritage? Comments heritage Description - all or part of site - setting of a listed building or listed building itself etc.

Is there any known Yes/No contamination on the site? Comments contamination Details of any known contamination - all or part of site. Are there any known potential Yes/No access/ highways issues? Comments potential Explanation of potential site access/ highways and any likely major issues. Is there access to a primary Yes/No school within 800m or 10mins walk? Comments primary school Details - name of closest primary school etc. Is there access to GP or Yes/No health centre within 800m or 10min walk Comments – access to a Details - name of closest primary school GP or health centre. Access to a post office/cash Yes/No machine within 800m or 10mins walk? Comments – post office/ cash Details -location of closest machine one - street name etc. Access to a bus stop with Yes/No regular service within 800m or 10mins Comments - access to bus Details -location of closest stop with a regular one - street name etc - bus service numbers/ routes Within 800m of a town centre? Yes/No Comments - within 800m of Conditions of route town centre etc. Example main road or via canal towpath etc. Within 800m of a major public Yes/ No transport node? (Definition of major public transport node to be provided). Comments - within 800m of a Description e.g. Stoke-on- major public transport node Trent railway station, city centre bus station etc. Within 800m of publically Yes/No accessible green space? Comments within 800m of a Description - type of space public transport node etc - route to get there. Are there any known Yes/No ownership constraints? Comments - any known Explanation ownership constraints Are there any known Yes/No legal/covenant constraints? Comments – any known legal/ Details - for example in covenant constraints several ownerships. Is the site in a HSE Yes/No consultation zone or hazardous installation Comments – HSE consultation Details zone or hazardous installation Availability Intention to develop - has a Yes/No timescale been indicated? Comments – has a timescale Details been indicated Achievability Site constraints which may Yes/No generate financial implications? Comments – constraints which Details of site constraints may generate financial which may generate implications financial implications Market viability? Developer Yes/No

interest? Comments – market viability/ Details for answer on developer interest market viability/ developer interest Is the site suitable?  Yes  No  Maybe Comments on is the site Description of whether the suitable site is suitable or not and any issues associated with the site Is the site available?  Yes  No  Maybe Comments on is the site Description of whether available available or not Is the site achievable?  Yes  No  Maybe Comments on is the site Description of whether the achievable site is achievable or not Year 1 Deliverable Capacity within Year 1 Year 2 Deliverable Capacity within Year 2 Year 3 Deliverable Capacity within Year 3 Year 4 Deliverable Capacity within Year 4 Year 5 Deliverable Capacity within Year 5 1-5 years Deliverable Supply Total capacity 1-5 years Year 6 Developable Capacity within Year 6 Year 7 Developable Capacity within Year 7 Year 8 Developable Capacity within Year 8 Year 9 Developable Capacity within Year 9 Year 10 Developable Capacity within Year 10 6-10 years Developable Total Capacity Years 6-10 11-15 years Developable Total capacity 11-15 years Not considered developable Total capacity currently Entry Year Year assessment completed and added to the database

Appendix C – Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent Joint Local Plan Call for Sites Response Form

Newcastle-under-Lyme & Stoke-on-Trent Joint Local Plan CALL FOR SITES

Response Form

Instructions for completing this form:  Please only complete if you are nominating a site to be considered within the forthcoming Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke on Trent Joint Local Plan.  If your site is already listed within the Newcastle-under-Lyme Strategic Housing Land Availability Assessment (2013/14), the Joint Employment Land Review (2011) or the ‘Call for Sites’ undertaken by Stoke-on-Trent City Council (2012) then please use this form to provide further additional detail to update or amend information previously submitted. Please complete a separate form for each site submitted.  Please complete this form electronically. If this is not possible then hand written copies should be completed in BLOCK CAPITALS.  Please provide as much detail as possible about the scale and nature of the development proposed on the site.

Please supply the following information:  A site plan (preferably at 1:1,250 scale) on an Ordnance Survey base map, showing a precise red line boundary around the extent of the area proposed for development. We regret that submissions received without a clear boundary shown on a site plan will not be considered.  Provide as much detail as possible on any constraints to development describe, including the extent of the constraint(s) and how they can be overcome. Where known, please show the location of any physical constraints on the site plan.  Please do not send additional documentation to support your submission, unless requested. All relevant information should be provided on the form. The council will contact you if further information is required.

Important points to note:  Nominating a site does not imply that the council agrees with the information and arguments put forward to support its development.  Please note sites of less than 0.25 hectares or capable of accommodating fewer than 5 dwellings will not be considered.  Only submit sites where you consider that there is a realistic prospect of development within the next 15 to 20 years.  Upon completing and submitting this form, you are providing consent for a representative of the council to access the site, with or without prior notification, for the purposes of assessing its suitability for development.

SECTION 1: CONTACT AND OWNERSHIP DETAILS Personal data will be used in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.

Contact Name:

Organisation: (where relevant)

Correspondence Address:

Email Telephone Number Address: Are you (please tick as appropriate): A Registered An agent: A Landowner: A Developer: Other (please specify): Provider:

☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

If you are an agent, please provide your client's name and address:

Are you (or your client) the current Yes: No: owner of the site? ☐ ☐

If yes, are you the sole owner or a Sole Owner: Part Owner: part owner of the site? ☐ ☐ If the site is in multiple ownership, please show the extent of the different ownerships on the site plan

If you are not the owner of the land, or if you partly own it, please provide the contact details of all other landowners.

SECTION 1: CONTACT AND OWNERSHIP DETAILS Personal data will be used in accordance with the Data Protection Act 1998.

Please provide the contact details of the person who can arrange access to the site:

SECTION 2: SITE DETAILS

Site Name:

Site Address: (if possible, please provide postcode)

Grid Reference (if Easting: Northing: known): Total Site Area:

Current SHLAA/ELR (hectares) Site Reference Number Developable Site Area: (if applicable): (hectares) Has the site been previously submitted to Newcastle-under-Lyme or Stoke-on-Trent as part of a similar process in the past 10 years? If so please provide details. Urban/ Urban: Rural: ☐ ☐ Rural Mix: ☐ Type of Site: Brownfield/ Brownfield: Greenfield: ☐ ☐ Greenfield Mix: ☐ Is the site: Vacant: ☐ Occupied: ☐ Partly Occupied: ☐

If occupied or partly occupied, when is the present use of the site anticipated to cease?

What is the current or most recent use of the site?

What is the historic use of the site?

(prior to the current/most recent use)

What are the adjoining land uses?

SECTION 3: PROPOSED USES

Please indicate the uses proposed to be developed on the site. Tick one box for a single use proposal or multiple boxes for a mixture of uses. Provide additional relevant information, including type and quantity of development proposed Type of Tick Specific Type Quantity Development Box e.g. family housing, apartments, town Number of dwellings: houses etc. Market Housing ☐

e.g. executive housing Number of dwellings: High Value Housing ☐

e.g social rented, intermediate housing etc Number of dwellings: Affordable Housing ☐

SECTION 3: PROPOSED USES

Please indicate the uses proposed to be developed on the site. Tick one box for a single use proposal or multiple boxes for a mixture of uses. Provide additional relevant information, including type and quantity of development proposed Type of Tick Specific Type Quantity Development Box e.g. office park, town centre offices etc. Number of units and floorspace in square metres (net and gross): Offices ☐

e.g. laboratories, science park etc. Number of units and floorspace in square metres (net and gross): Research and Development ☐

e.g. factories, assembly plants etc. Number of units and floorspace in square metres (net and gross): Industrial ☐

e.g. storage buildings, distribution centres Number of units and floorspace in etc. square metres (net and gross): Warehousing ☐

e.g. supermarket, department store, clothing Floorspace in square metres (net and store etc. gross): Retail ☐

e.g. public house, café, restaurant etc. Floorspace in square metres (net and gross): Food and Drink ☐

e.g. hotel, hostel, bed and breakfast, holiday Number of bedrooms: let etc. Tourist Accommodation ☐

e.g. sports centre, gymnasium, golf course Number of courts, pitches etc: etc. Sports Facilities ☐

e.g. theatre, cinema, bowling alley, bingo Number screens, halls etc: hall etc. Entertainment Facilities ☐

e.g. park and garden, allotments, playing Size in hectares, number of plots, field etc. pitches etc: Open Space ☐

e.g. Extra Care, warden controlled etc. Number of dwelling units: Specialist Residential ☐

e.g. halls of residence, student village, Number of student spaces: shared housing etc. Student Accommodation ☐

e.g. individual houses, apartment block etc. Number of occupants per unit and Houses in number of units: Multiple ☐ Occupation

e.g. permanent site, transit site etc. Number of plots: Gypsies and Travellers ☐

e.g. seasonal site etc. Number of plots: Travelling Showpeople ☐

e.g school, college, university, training Floorspace in square metres, number of centre, library, museum etc. students: Education ☐

SECTION 3: PROPOSED USES

Please indicate the uses proposed to be developed on the site. Tick one box for a single use proposal or multiple boxes for a mixture of uses. Provide additional relevant information, including type and quantity of development proposed Type of Tick Specific Type Quantity Development Box e.g. health centres, surgeries etc. Number of consulting rooms, patients served per day: Health ☐

Community centres, village halls, places of Floorspace in square metres: worship Community ☐

Specify, e.g. windfarm, solar farm Number of generating units: Renewable Energy ☐

e.g. highway, rail transport etc Corridor length and width, movements per day Transport ☐

Specify type: State quantity: Any Other Type Not Listed Above ☐

SECTION 4: SITE FEATURES AND CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPMENT

Please mark features and constraints on the site plan where their location can be identified Individual Trees: ☐ Woodland: ☐ Does any of the following Hedgerows: ☐ Scrub/Grassland: ☐ vegetation exist on the site? Other vegetation

(please specify):

Flat? ☐ Undulating? ☐ Steep? ☐ On High Ground? ☐ Is the site: Please describe any other

landscape features: Grade 1: ☐ Grade 2: ☐ If the site is currently in agricultural use, what is the Grade 3: ☐ Grade 4: ☐ grading of the land? Grade 5: ☐ Not Agricultural: ☐ Are there any existing buildings or structures on the Yes: ☐ No: ☐ site? If yes, please specify what buildings or structures exist on the site:

Demolished: ☐ Relocated: ☐ What is proposed to happen to the existing buildings or structures on the site? Converted: ☐ Reconfigured: ☐ (tick all that apply and indicate locations on site plan) Other

(please specify):

Site of Special Green Belt: ☐ Scientific Interest: ☐

Do any of the following Local Nature Conservation designations apply to the site? Reserve: ☐ Area: ☐ Scheduled Listed Building: ☐ Ancient ☐ Monument:

SECTION 4: SITE FEATURES AND CONSTRAINTS TO DEVELOPMENT

Please mark features and constraints on the site plan where their location can be identified

Other designation (please specify): Mineshafts: ☐ Landfill: ☐ Are you aware of any of the following ground conditions Contamination: ☐ Flood Risk: ☐ affecting the site: Other

(please specify): Are there any overground or underground cables or pipes within the site? Please specify and mark the locations on the site plan. Please show the route of any cables and pipes on the site plan Are there any other constraints affecting the site? (e.g. restrictive covenants, protected species/habitats etc.) For all of the constraints identified in the questions above, what measures do you think would be needed in order to overcome these to ensure that the site is deliverable within the next 15-20 years?

SECTION 5: ACCESSIBILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Please identify the proposed access point on the site plan

Motorway/Major Trunk Other Major Road Road: ☐ (e.g. ‘A’ road): ☐ (M6/A50/A500) What type of road Minor Road: Local Distributor Road: would provide (e.g. unclassified/ (e.g. ‘B’ road) ☐ ☐ access to the site: residential road)

Unadopted/Private No Direct Road Road: ☐ Access: ☐

Please name the road(s) that would provide access to the site: (e.g. A34 Newcastle Road) Potential for direct Already has access via access, subject to Does the site have a halt or station: ☐ ☐ access, or potential Network Rail approval: access to the rail network? Potential for a new rail No potential for rail link: ☐ access: ☐

Please provide any further details about the potential for rail access:

Footpaths/Rights of Are there any Cycle Routes: access points, or Way ☐ ☐ potential access points for the Other: Bus Stop/Bus Route: following? ☐ (please specify below) ☐

Please provide any further information about these other potential access routes:

Would any access points to the site need to cross land in Yes: ☐ No: ☐ other ownership?

If yes, please provide the contact details of the landowner affected:

SECTION 5: ACCESSIBILITY AND INFRASTRUCTURE

Are there any known disputes over the access and use of the site? If so, please provide details: Please indicate if the site is already serviced by any of the following: Mains Mains Water Supply: Electricity: Gas: Broadband: Sewerage:

☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ ☐ Have any discussions already taken place with utility companies in Yes: ☐ No: ☐ relation to this site? If yes, please provide copies of any relevant correspondence

Are there specific infrastructure requirements for the proposed use? If so, please provide details:

SECTION 6: DELIVERABILITY

Within what timescale do you estimate that the site could be brought forward for development? If the site is to be phased, please tick more than one time period. 0 to 5 years 6 to 10 years 11 to 15 years 16-20 years

☐ ☐ ☐ ☐

Has the site been marketed for Yes: No: development? ☐ ☐ Please provide any details of expressions of interest received or development options arranged with potential developers Would any adjoining land uses positively or negatively affect the marketability of the site? If so, please provide details Are there any other development opportunities nearby that could help to bring forward a larger and more Yes: ☐ No: ☐ comprehensive development scheme?

Please state the site name, address and reference number (if applicable) of other development opportunities:

Has a viability assessment been made of the development potential Yes: ☐ No: ☐ of the site for the proposed use? If yes, please provide a summary of the calculation and findings of the viability assessment: (or attach a separate supporting statement) Are there any financial matters that would affect the delivery of the proposed development? If so, please provide details: Does the site currently have Yes: No: planning approval for development? ☐ ☐ If yes, please provide the planning application reference number and a brief description of the approved development: Please show the extent of any part of the site approved for development on the site plan Is there a realistic prospect that the development will be fully Yes: No: implemented before the planning ☐ ☐ approval expires? If the site does not have planning approval, when do you anticipate that a planning application can be submitted for the proposed development? Once construction has commenced, how many years do you anticipate that it will take for the

SECTION 6: DELIVERABILITY development to be completed?

How much development do you anticipate will be completed on an annual basis (i.e. number of dwellings, amount of floorspace etc.)?

SECTION 7: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION

Please provide any additional comments that you have in regard to the site: (Continue on a separate sheet if necessary.)

Declaration: I understand that the personal and other data I provide will be used to inform the council’s emerging planning policy framework for its duration and may also be used to help ensure the accuracy and completeness of information held for other council purposes. I understand that the details submitted may be made available to the public in line with The Local Government Access to Information Act and Freedom of Information Act. I want to be consulted on the Newcastle-under-Lyme and Stoke-on-Trent Local Plan in the future (please tick if yes)

Signature Date

For sites in Newcastle-under-Lyme please return your completed form and site plan by

31st October 2014 to:

Planning Policy Email: [email protected] Civic Offices Merrial Street Telephone: 01782 742467 Newcastle-under-Lyme

Staffordshire www.newcastle-staffs.gov.uk/all-services/planning/planning- ST5 2AG policy

For sites in Stoke-on-Trent please return your completed form and site plan by 31st

October 2014 to: Planning and Transportation Email: [email protected] Policy 4.0 Glossary Civic Centre Telephone: 01782 232353 Glebe Street Ancient Woodland: An area that has

Stoke-on-Trent been wooded continuously since at www.stoke.gov.uk/planningpolicy ST4 1HH least 1600 AD. Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land: The most flexible, productive and efficient areas of agricultural land, which can best deliver future crops for food and non- food uses. The National Planning Policy Framework defines this as land falling into Grades 1,2 and 3a of the Agricultural Land Classification. Biodiversity Alert Sites: Locally designated nature conservation sites (also known as Local Wildlife Sites) Call for Sites: A consultation exercise in which landowners, developers and the public are invited to submit land to a council, so that land can be considered for its potential suitability for development. Deliverable Sites: Sites which are available now, offer a suitable location for development now and are achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years. In particular this means that the development site should be financially viable. Developable Sites: Sites which are in a suitable location for housing, where there is a reasonable prospect that the site is available for development and could be viably developed at the point in time envisaged. Local Plan: A Local Plan sets out planning policies and land use proposals which will be used in determining applications for planning permission and to direct strategic investment. Employment Land Review (ELR): These assessments examine the likely demand for, and supply of, land for employment uses. They assess sites in a current employment use and potential future employment sites. Evidence Base: The studies, reports and assessments that support the development of planning policy documents, such as the Local Plan. The evidence base should provide should be adequate, relevant and up-to-date evidence on economic, social and environmental characteristics of the area in question. Flood Risk Zones (1, 2 & 3): Flood Risk Zones identify areas where there is a low (Zone 1), medium (Zone 2) or high (Zone 3) probability of river or sea flooding, ignoring the presence of flood defences. National planning policy requires that development should be allocated in areas at lower risk of flooding. Functional Economic Market Area (FEMA): An area reflecting the local commercial property market, based on an understanding of the requirements of the market regarding the location of premises and the spatial factors used in analysing demand and supply. Defining such areas may involve a consideration of factors such as travel to work areas and housing market areas. Green Space Strategy: A strategy which seeks to ensure that green spaces fulfil their potential to deliver environmental, economic and social benefits through a strategic approach to planning and management. This is based on an audit of all existing green spaces within an area. Heritage Asset: A building, monument, site, place, area or landscape identified as having a degree of significance meriting consideration in planning decisions, because of its heritage interest. Heritage asset includes designated heritage assets and asset identified by the local planning authority (including local listing). Housing Market Area (HMA): An area defined by household demand and preferences for all types of housing, reflecting the key functional linkages between places where people live and work. In practice, such areas are defined by examining factors including household prices, migration patterns and commuting flows. Local Nature Reserves: Local areas which are of special interest due to their wildlife or geological features. Designated by Local authorities under the National Parks and Access to the Countryside Act 1949. National Planning Policy Framework: The National Planning Policy Framework is a material consideration in determining planning applications and a local authority must have regard to it in preparing a Local Plan.

Objectively Assessed Needs (OAN): For housing, the OAN is the unconstrained need for housing within a housing market area, which a Local Plan must seek to provide for as far as is consistent with the policies of the NPPF. Planning Practice Guidance: An online resource provided by the Department for Communities and Local Government which seeks to provides plain English guidance on national planning policies and legislation. Play Pitch Strategy: A strategy for the maintenance and improvement of sports pitches within an area. This includes an audit of existing sports pitches and sporting need to inform future land use decisions on these sites. Ramsar Sites: Wetlands of international importance, designated under the intergovernmental treaty of the Ramsar Convention, which aims to stop the loss of wetlands. Regionally Important Geological Sites: Non-statutory areas of local importance for nature conservation that complement nationally and internationally designated geological and wildlife sites. Also known as Local Geological Sites. Sites of Biological Interest: Locally designated nature conservation sites (also known as Local Wildlife Sites) Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI): Sites which are protected by national law to conserve their wildlife or geology under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Special Areas of Conservation (SACs): Sites protected by the EU Habitats Directive and English and Welsh law, due to containing habitats or species of birds that are threatened or valuable Strategic Housing Market Assessment (SHMA): A technical study which identifies the housing needs within a Housing Market Area (HMA). This includes factors such as the number of homes which need to be planned for, the need for affordable housing within an area and the needs of specific groups such as older people, minority groups, people with disabilities and students. Tree Preservation Order (TPO): A Tree Preservation Order is an order made by a local planning authority in England to protect specific trees, groups of trees or woodlands in the interests of amenity. Windfall Sites: Sites which come forward for housing despite not having been identified through the Local Plan process. Examples of windfall sites include previously-developed sites which have unexpectedly become available for development.