SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 2

SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 2

SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 3

SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 4

SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 5

SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 6

SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 7

SJS Potts Ltd chartered Town Planner page 8

SJS Potts Ltd chartered Town Planner page 9

SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 10

The Burke family wish to object to para 4. 10 where the strategy asserts it can accommodate new development which has been demonstrated in the review of the Potential Sites Background Paper it cannot. The maintenance of the existing Green Belt cannot be sustained and will not meet the claimed strategic objectives relating to open space, recreation and biodiversity in respect of the Burradon/Camperdown site as it is private land without public access. Para 89 of NPPF is relevant where at the last bullet point it states that exceptions to no development in the Green Belt include: ‘limited infilling or the partial or complete redevelopment of previously developed sites (brownfield land), whether redundant or in continuing use (excluding temporary buildings), which would not have a greater impact on the openness of the Green Belt and the purpose of including land within it than the existing development’. To ensure requirements for homes can be met the spatial strategy proposed states that most housing development will be located partly within areas of …the North West where development could bring particular benefits to the regeneration of the area. The Burradon/Camperdown site les within the NW Area and is a former colliery where licensed tipping has taken place but remediation means that the land is capable of supporting 80 k. N/sqm for normal house foundations and there is no land fill gas issue. These costs are far lower than redeveloping many of the Potential Sites eg Willington Quay. Access could be provided as part of the development for the public to enjoy Burradon Pond. The Council would obtain a capital receipt from the development if this land to enable it to carry out other parts of the strategy. A plan of the Burradon/Camperdown site is attached. included below: - SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 11

The square of land forming the access between the track and the Burke site is owned by North Tyneside Council who have granted an option over it (Paul Green) to provide an access to the Burke land for residential development. They intend to seek C 3 permission on their own land in due course. A lottery bid has been made to manage the pond in the SW corner of the site by the Northumbria Wildlife Trust (Joanne Norman). A site investigation has been carried out (REC Ltd) which concludes the site was tipped with inert waste only. A TA has been done (Allan Short) which working with North Tyneside Engineers and the Highways Agency (to inc A 19/Tyne Tunnel), demonstrates the site can accept up to 500 dwellings. A layout has been done (Intersect Architects) indicating 480 dwellings inc 25% affordable housing to meet Policy DM/7. 5. SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 12

Para 4. 39 - 4. 49 deals with the NW Communities Sub-area Strategy. Camperdown and Burradon are included in the collection of communities made up by this sub area. Policy AS/1. 6 c states that: ‘North Tyneside Council will work with owners of vacant sites to bring them back into suitable, beneficial use. This will reduce unattractive dereliction, encourage investment and improve quality of life for the community. ’ Burradon Pond could be added to para 4. 44 should it form part of a residential development. Para 4. 46 refers to a long term council aspiration for development at Weetslade but if this is for employment only it will never occur, especially without the Sandy Lane bypass which cannot be funded. Weetslade could be developed for housing as part of an overall mixed-use scheme. The Annitsford Farm site should be replaced with the Burradon/Camperdown site in the NW Area which brings wider benefits. Para 4. 53 -4. 65 deals with Green Belt and Safeguarded land. There should be a review of some of the safeguarded land which hasn’t come forward rather than accepting its contribution to the strategy eg Murton bad ground. Policy S/3. 1 recites the 5 purposes of the Green Belt form the former PPS 2 and NPPF. It fails to take the opportunity Newcastle and Northumberland have of a review. In particular the Burke family objects to para 4. 60 which states that: ‘The draft Local Plan has consequently not sought to review or amend the existing boundaries of the Green Belt in North Tyneside’. There is no rigorous review of the safeguarded land’s capacity to meet the development needs. Para 4. 52 is not consistent with NPPF in that it still employs a sequential test of re-use of brown field land. NPPF applies the sequential test to retail and flooding and not to residential land allocations. Para 111 does encourage reuse of brownfield land where its not of high environmental value such as Burradon/Camperdown and Weetslade. SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 13

The Burke family objects to Policy S. 3. 3 which seeks to allocate new safeguarded land only after the end of the plan period. SJS Potts Ltd Chartered Town Planner page 14