Strategic Land Review - draft methodology
1. Incorporate when fully confirmed, baseline position re what additional land is
needed (based on existing evidence base (SHLAA and ELR; Green
Infrastructure Strategy when ready) and taking account of any reconsideration of
assumptions e.g. on population which have not yet been resolved. This will take
into account:

Population growth requirement

Housing numbers requirement

Housing land requirement, based on the housing numbers and
appropriate assumptions about (i) density and (ii) mix of types of
dwelling. This may need to be revisited later in the process when
the portfolio of potential sites is clearer as appropriate density could
depend partly on location and certainly on likely viability and
deliverability.

Employment land requirement (relating only to land for
warehousing and distribution in Gateshead based on the current
evidence position)

Green Infrastructure requirement

Any other identified needs which cannot be met from existing
available land
Some basic information from bullet points 1, 2 and 4 will be required to be
incorporated into initial call-out / consultation material. The remainder will be
refined alongside the consultation process.
2. Carry out call-out for sites, indicating that representations supporting sites not
previously accepted should state as far as possible how or to what extent these
meet the criteria, and combining it with consultation on the methodology below.
This effectively incorporates a full SHLAA call-out and enables any changes in
deliverability, viability or availability to be picked up. However this will be wider
than traditional call-out and involve inviting views from the following categories of
potential respondent:

Local communities

Landowners and developers

Local interest groups

Statutory consultees
3. Incorporate all existing sites known from the existing SHLAAs and ELRs either found suitable, or found unsuitable only because of existing planning
designations - into joint database
4. Establish criteria for selection of additional sites or areas of Green Belt (or
potentially not in the Green Belt, if officers of either authority identify as
appropriate for consideration any sites not otherwise coming forward) for each
use (for housing / warehousing and distribution / other) and a scoring mechanism
or means of categorisation for each use:
taking account of the following four categories of criteria:
Principle of sustainable development issues

Existing and potential sustainability of location (transport links etc)

Proximity to existing settlements including the main urban area, and
distance from / access to the urban core

Proximity to employment and services, including
Identified major employment locations
Rail, metro and bus
Health service facilities including GPs, but only where there is a
lack of existing capacity and the development and others
nearby could not make up the shortfall
primary school provision, on the same basis

Ability of the proposed site, on its own or with others adjoining, to
accommodate and support appropriate facilities and infrastructure
(likely to include green infrastructure (public open space, children's
play etc), and a wider range of facilities and services on larger sites

Sites and areas that will be ruled out (nationally and statutorily
designated sites):
Local Nature Reserves
Sites of Special Scientific Interest
Sites with protected species present (unless there is an alternative
approach allowing development to proceed acceptably)
Conservation Areas (other than appropriate enabling development,
conversion of existing buildings or small infill sites)
Tree Preservation Orders
Ancient Monuments
Newburn Ford Battlefield
Sites on the national register of Historic Parks and Gardens

Impact on the local environment including the following site/area
characteristics and locally determined designations (these will not
be ruled out, but any development would have to be able to be
justified on the grounds that there is no significant damage to the
resource in question):
higher-quality or more sensitive landscapes
aspects of landscape character worthy of conservation
public open space
sports facilities
allotments, except sites where there is no demand nor likely to be
local wildlife sites
wildlife enhancement corridors
ancient woodland
sites on the local register of historic parks and gardens
archaeological sites
any other green infrastructure resources
safeguarded minerals sites

Any other planning considerations
Role of the Green Belt issues

Identification of Green Belt land which is important to meet strategic
Green Belt objectives. A scoring mechanism will be developed
whereby each area is graded (on a scale of e.g. 0 to 3, with 3
representing the highest and “worst” score) according to how
important it is to meeting each strategic objective of the Green Belt.
The strategic objectives being (PPG2):
i.
Check unrestricted sprawl of large built-up areas
Sites which score worst will be those which have a boundary
with the existing large built-up area(s) (these will be defined)
but will have a high proportion of their boundary with
countryside or smaller settlements. Sites which do not adjoin
the existing large built-up areas will not attract a score under
this heading.
ii.
Prevent neighbouring towns from merging
Land in the Green Belt will be categorised in advance for its
contribution to this objective. Sites in the areas concerned
will score more poorly than sites which are not, and sites
which actually join two settlements together will attract the
poorest score
iii.
Assist in safeguarding the countryside from encroachment
Scores will be calculated according to the proportion of the
site boundary which is shared with any existing settlement.
The worst scores will therefore be for sites surrounded by
countryside.
iv.
Preserve the setting and special character of historic towns
Taking villages into account as well as towns, relevant where
Conservation Areas include a settlement or part of a
settlement, and also land in the Green Belt (e.g. Ryton,
Marley Hill and Lamesley in Gateshead). These locations will
be examined to establish whether sites identified in the
Green Belt also contribute to the setting of these
Conservation Areas.
v.
Assist in urban regeneration by encouraging the recycling of
derelict and other urban land
It might be considered that all land in the Green Belt
contributes equally to this objective and that there is no clear
way of identifying whether some sites are less likely than
others to achieve this objective, so it is proposed not to
score against it.

Role of Green Belt land identified as strategic in Green
Infrastructure Study
Contribution to meeting Core Strategy objectives

Minimum size 0.1 hectares or 3 dwellings where housing is
proposed

Type of site, i.e. whether suitable for housing, warehousing and
distribution or any other specifically identified need (potentially
including green infrastructure); if for housing, what type of housing
(market segment). Sites can be suitable for more than one use but
the councils are not seeking uses other than those listed and they
are not likely to be appropriate except small scale provision within
housing (e.g. open space and possibly small-scale shopping to
meet needs arising from new housing).

Appropriateness of sites or general locations to take account of
specific local issues/objectives e.g. regeneration of villages, needs
for land for essential public services such as schools, etc.

For employment land, proximity to areas of employment deprivation

Availability of any additional previously developed (brownfield) sites
(though being cautious that this is not in itself a justification for the
removal of land from the Green Belt)
Practicality

Flood risk

Hazardous installation consultation zone

For warehousing and distribution sites in particular, Impact on the
highways network (especially trunk roads) and whether this can be
sufficiently mitigated or is a major constraint

Deliverability: whether available now or subject to:
termination or cessation of existing use
clearance
remediation of dereliction and/or contamination
resolution of legal issues
or any need to resolve, or establish the practicality or otherwise of
resolving, issues with
access
availability of utilities
topography
neighbouring land uses
traffic congestion, or
the views of the landowner(s))
and when the site is likely to be available

Viability
5. Carry out initial assessment exercise of known existing sites, sites identified by
respondents to the call-out and additional areas identified by applying the criteria
above.
6. Select initial areas which are at this stage preferred by each Council and show
options for approaches to provision if relevant (e.g. where there is a conflict
between more than one potential use of the same site, or alternative options for
what land to propose to allocate where there is no clear preferable option).
Ensure that all reasonable alternatives are considered.
7. Review to establish

Whether there is a resulting overall over- or under-supply of
capacity

if so, establish whether the need to increase or reduce the amount
of Green Belt (or other) land which has been identified is likely to be
able to be accommodated on the basis of amounts proportional to
the requirement for housing/employment land in each authority
area; or whether the amount should be disproportionately met by
one authority because of unavoidable constraints
8. On the basis of the above, identify a revised portfolio of sites (and the purpose
/ mix of uses of each) to meet development requirements, potentially including
areas currently used for employment, open spaces and countryside. Ensure that
all reasonable alternatives have been considered.
9. Approach landowners of additional sites/areas where appropriate, to establish
their deliverability.
10. Consider the appropriateness, in the context of the proposed housing
trajectory, of assuming that some of these sites may only be able to contribute to
meeting needs later in the plan period.
11. Review again to confirm that the right amount of land has been identified, that
all reasonable alternatives have been considered and that and the balance
between the two authorities' areas is acceptable and justifiable.
12. Incorporate in submission draft CS.