Appendix 2

THE SUSTAINABILITY APPRAISAL FOR ST LAWRENCE SQUARE SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT (SPD)

1. Sustainability Appraisal and SEA

The purpose of sustainability appraisal (SA) is to promote sustainable development through the integration of social, environmental and economic considerations into the preparation of planning documents.

Under Section 39(2) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, a sustainability appraisal is required for Local Development Documents, including Supplementary Planning Documents (SPD). Government guidance enables the SA to be combined with the European Directive 2001/42/EC requirement for a Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA).

The Environmental Assessment Regulations 2004 (EA Regulations) provide for exemptions to the SEA requirement. This sustainability appraisal is not fully SEA compliant, as it was considered that the detail to be added to existing policy by the SPD is not likely to result in significant environmental effects beyond those resulting from the impact of the existing policy itself. Consultation on this matter was carried out in accordance with the Environmental Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004 and the Screening Determination is attached to this document as Appendix 1

2. Methodology

This SA relies on the SA framework developed for the Core Strategy. The review of relevant plans and programmes, the identified baseline information and the identified key sustainability issues has informed this SPD.

In this instance, as the impact of the proposed SPD on the identified SA issues was considered to be of a low level, a simple application of the sustainability objectives identified for the Core Strategy was considered appropriate.

The SA processes has five stages:

1. Setting the context and objectives, establishing the baseline and deciding on the scope: for this the appraisal relied on the SA Core Strategy.

2.Developing and refining options: the appraisal has assumed two scenarios, Option 1 relies solely on the existing policies in the UDP and Option 2 uses the SPD in addition to the policies in the UDP.

3.Appraising the effects: Option 1 and 2 were appraised against the Sustainability Objectives identified in the Draft SA of the Core Strategy.

4.Consulting on the plan and SA report: this appraisal will be consulted on alongside the Draft SPD.

5.Monitoring implementation of the plan.

3. Context

3.1 Background

The site is located within a key regeneration area of the City in 2003 with the publication of the Regeneration Strategy for the LowerOuseburnValley (2003). This document set out the vision for the Valley of a mixed use urban village, whereby people could live, work and play together. In addition, in response to housing market renewal, the Interim Planning Guidance on Housing seeks to encourage housing as part of a mixed use development proposals within the OuseburnValley.

The emerging SPD builds upon the aforementioned documents, providing a robust planning framework in terms of design focusing on environmental sustainability, urban density, mixed use and diversity.

3.2 Sustainability Objectives

The draft SPD seeks to add detail to policies EN1.1 and H1.3 of the Unitary Development Plan, and build upon policies SD1, SD1.1and SD1.4. These policies will be examined comprehensively, forming a framework from which a planning application can be developed.

Policy EN1.1 of the Newcastle Unitary Development Plan (1998) aims to:

  • Retain the best buildings
  • Take full advantage of landform, landscape and other site features
  • Integrate development into its setting
  • Achieve designs that relate to the materials and design characteristics of the surrounding built environment
  • Facilitate safe pedestrian movement
  • Promote equal accessibility for all users
  • Ensure new buildings are adaptable for other purposes
  • Co-ordinate developments of more than one building
  • Incorporate landscaping as part of design and maximise tree planting
  • Minimise adverse impacts on land uses nearby to development
  • Minimise impacts on activities on neighbouring open land and countryside
  • Maximise the use of buildings, structures and land forms to screen noise sensitive development and spaces.

Policy H1.3 - Where appropriate, the council may seek to enter into planning obligations With a developer for a suitable provision of affordable dwellings in new Developments for people on lower incomes

Policy SD1 states that "The city council will work towards environmentally sustainable development which meets the economic and social needs of the city."

SD1.1 - Energy consumption and carbon dioxide emissions will be reduced by:

A. Locating the most intensive forms of development at the city centre and its fringes, close to metro stations, and along major bus routes;

B. Encouraging mixed use development and activity;

C. Retaining areas of mixed use development and activity;

D. Efficient use of road space;

E. Encouraging the development of renewable energy; and

F. Maintaining the compact nature of the city.

SD1.4 - The development and use of renewable energy will be encouraged by:

A. Maximising passive solar gain through building design and orientation;

B. Introducing photovoltaic cells onto appropriate buildings;

C. Utilising bio gas from energy crops or waste; and

D. The development of wind turbines in suitable locations.

The central purpose of the Masterplan is to provide a robust planning framework for the area, thus adding detail to the above aims. It will do this by ensuring durable and effective implementation of development proposals in Ouseburn Central that best takes account of existing relevant documents and serves the existing and future communities. This will in turn, contribute to the successful regeneration of the valley, in line with the vision of the Regeneration Strategy.

The Masterplan document has the following objectives:

  • to set the basis for pre-application planning discussions in order to speed up the development process
  • ultimately, to result in a high quality sustainable development

The Masterplan sets out to achieve these objectives by providing mandatory principles and regulations that implement the delivery of national, regional, city-wide and area wide policy in clear detail.

4. Issues and Options Appraisal

4.1 Introduction

SA guidance requires the assessment of alternatives to the implementation of the SPD. To this extent and given the specific nature of the SPD topic, only one alternative has been identified namely the ‘no plan’ or ‘business as usual’ approach. The benefits of appraising this option include being able to identify any significant improvements the SPD will make in sustainable development terms by scoring against the SA objectives. This method is consistent with DCLG

guidance.

4.2 The Options Appraisal

The assessment and scoring process was undertaken by the Ouseburn Central team consisting of members of the City Councils Regeneration Team and the appointed designers – Hopper, Howe and Sadler with advice from other teams in the Council. The result of the appraisal is reproduced in appendix 2.

The Implementation of the SPD scenario (option 2 at appendix 2) has been assessed holistically by a review of the entire Draft Document and a professional judgment has predicted the relationship with the SA objectives based on the SPD’s content.

The assessment of the ‘do nothing’ or ‘business as usual approach’ (option 1 at appendix 2) considers the baseline approach and appraises existing policies afforded by the Local Plan (1997) on this subject.

An appraisal of specific policies has not been carried out as are likely to be neutral in effect, therefore the SA represents a clarification of existing UDP policy rather than any new policy direction or mechanism.

4.3 Summary of Sustainability Appraisal of Options

Option 1, no change this will mean:

  • Reliance on existing, limited policy of the UDP;
  • Officers within the Planning and Transportation Division to comment on individual planning applications for the area in light of requirements and provide expert guidance and recommendations in light of contentious issues
  • Planning applications assessed in light of the most current guidance documents
  • Where necessary refusal based on general guidance at national and local level that specifies the need for a comprehensive phased development

Option 2, the implementation of the SPD has been appraised to score positively across a number of social and economic objectives. Detailed design principles have been achieved having taken into consideration all of the issues. The benefits of this SPD includes:

  • Planning applications come forward in accordance with the agreed design specification and are assessed in accordance with the specific criteria and regulations identified in the robust document
  • Emphasis placed on a design led process
  • Specific principles laid out influencing the fit of new development
  • Key issues of design, amenity, parking, access and contamination agreed in advance of applications for planning permission
  • Accepted high quality design principles applied to the site
  • Minimum standards of energy sensitive design defined
  • Minimum standards of accessibility through design defined
  • A comprehensive and deliverable development
  • The character of the area lay out principle factors influencing the fit of new development with the existing built fabric
  • Key transportation issues, most notably car parking and pedestrian/cycle access requirements agreed in advance of applications for planning permission
  • Accepted, contemporary principles of deliverable design applied to the area-wide context
  • The mix of housing on the site defined

5. Appraisal of SPD

5.1 Predicting and evaluating the likely effects of the options and the SPD

The intended impacts of the introduction of option 2 are to achieve the many different requirements laid out for the area in a realistically achievable way, consistent with the existing policies already in place and works towards a comprehensive response for the redevelopment of this area of the Ouseburn, striving beyond the existing documents. This visions is shared with the community.

The potential negative impacts of introducing option 2 are mainly financial and are set out below:

  1. Dependence on a specific design could increase the cost of redevelopment over and above its normal value, thus slowing the pace of development in the long term and delaying the creation of a sustainable community;
  2. Dependence upon the landowners and developers of the site to incorporate the principles laid out, given that some of the sites are likely to be sold, expectations of what is achievable within the masterplan maybe misinterpreted;

3.Any significant deviation from the design specification may make some of the specific principles in the masterplan harder to achieve, thus slowing the pace of development in the long term and delaying the creation of a sustainable community;

4.Failure to achieve a design style that aspires high enough beyond the existing built form, or conversely is not seen as a design style of choice locally and regionally, could blight effective delivery of sustainable communities outlined in the Regeneration Strategy.

Potential negative effects will be mitigated in the ways outlined below:

  1. The Plan has been developed to ensure a number of phased approaches are possible;
  2. As well as the planning process, the Council will also control the development of the land through its land ownership controls and subsequent sale/leasing constraints;
  3. The design specification will be subject to independent valuations throughout the marketing and development process which will identify a deliverable scheme in the current market. In the worst case scenario external funding streams have been identified, namely Bridging Newcastle Gateshead (including gap funding) that will be accessible should the current market significantly change. However a significant market shift may trigger a retraction of the masterplan if deemed appropriate.

A multi-disciplinary team has overseen the production of the design guide, which involves members of the Council, Council officers, the local community and consultants, who have been involved in the process from the start. The team has a good understanding of the issues and at what stage agreements can drafted in relation to the implementation stage. A range of exercises will be used within the statutory community consultation period to ensure final guidance is both supported by the local community and responds to the aspirations of real and potential residents of the area.

6. Implementation

6.1 Introduction

The SPD will be implemented formally through the development planning process and pre-application discussions for developers working primarily within the boundary and outside the area in order to influence the quality of development at an early stage.

6.2 Proposals for Monitoring

All local authorities will be required to produce Annual Monitoring Reports (AMR) as part of requirements laid down in the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. Supplementary Planning Documents are not finite and will be kept under review via the AMR which will identify where a SPD is no longer required or where previously adopted, has become need of updating or replacement. The Consultation Paper on Sustainability Appraisal of Regional Spatial Strategies and Local Development Frameworks identifies ways in which monitoring the plan for sustainability effects can help to answer questions such as:

  • Were the assessment’s predictions of sustainability effects accurate?
  • Is the plan contributing to the achievement of desired SA objectives and targets
  • Are mitigation measures performing as well as expected?
  • Are there any adverse effects? Are these within acceptable limits, or is remedial
  • action desirable?

It is not necessary to monitor everything or monitor an effect indefinitely. Instead monitoring should be focussed on:

  • Significant sustainability effects that may give rise to irreversible damage, with a view to identifying trends before such damage is caused.
  • Significant effects where there was uncertainty in the SA and where monitoring would enable preventative or mitigation measures to be undertaken.

The AMR monitors a number of indicators under the 16 objectives that have been formulated to appraise the SPD. Under each of these objectives there are one or more targets and indicators. These indicators were identified as part of developing the SA framework and it may be appropriate to select a number of these to supplement the monitoring information. Measuring these indicators will enable the Council to establish a link between implementation of the SPD and the likely significant effect being monitored. However, it is important that adequate emphasis is placed on interpreting the data and analysing the results, rather than simply collecting information on a large numbers of indicators. It may also become apparent that other alternative indicators will be better monitoring tools and so should be added to the monitoring framework as required or that some do not assist in the process and might be deleted or replaced.

Appendix 1

Determination not to carry out a Strategic Environmental Assessment Directive

compliant Sustainability Appraisal Process

NEWCASTLECITY COUNCIL LOCAL DEVELOPMENT FRAMEWORK

ST LAWRENCE SQUARE SUPPLEMENTARY PLANNING DOCUMENT

DETERMINATION UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANS AND PROGRAMMES REGULATIONS 2004

Determination:

Newcastle City Council has determined that it is not likely that the St Lawrence Square Central Masterplan will have significant environmental effects. Consequently, Newcastle City Council has determined that an environmental assessment, in accordance with Part 3 of the Environmental Plans and Programmes Regulations 2004, is not required.

In accordance with Regulation 9, the statutory consultation bodies were consulted before this determination was made.

Reasons for Determination:

This decision reflects the requirements of paragraph (6)(b) of regulation 5, as the SPD will only provide minor modifications to the polices in the Newcastle upon Tyne Unitary Development Plan it relies on.

Date of Determination:

****

Appendix 2 - Summary of Appraisal of Options

Ref SA objective Option 1 – No change Option 2 – Introduction of a Design Code SPD

Convention used during the appraisal:

++ / Significant beneficial/desirable effect / - - / Significant negative/undesirable effect
+ / Beneficial / desirable effect / - / Negative / undesirable effect
0 / Negligible or no effect / ? / Uncertainty over effect; no clear link

Summary of Appraisal

Ref / SA Objective / Option 1 - No Change / Option 2 - Introduction of a design led SPD
1 / To promote strong
inclusive communities,
involved in decision
making for their area / Likely to be involved at planning application stage in the development of the area
0 / Will be aware and consulted through the production of the draft, having input into the plans, will have greater understanding when planning application comes forward
++
2 / To promote health and
well-being while
reducing inequalities in
health / Recreation routes and areas will be improved as part of S106
0 / The masterplan will provide a holistic approach -Improvements in recreational routes and leisure within the area will be identified
+
3 / To ensure everyone has the opportunity of living in a decent and
affordable home / The site is likely to incorporate an element of housing although
type/tenure is unknown at this stage it is likely to involve a range
+ / The masterplan includes a specification for a minimum of 20% of affordable housing and a range of types
++
4 / To ensure good accessibility for all jobs, facilities, goods and services in the City whilst reducing the need to travel. / The development of the site (timescale unknown) will significantly contribute to the redevelopment of the area, increasing demand for public transport.
+ / The site is likely to be redeveloped in shorter
timescale, increasing accessibility and the demand
for public transport
+
5 / To protect and
enhance the City's cultural heritage and diversity / Unlikely to impact
0 / Unlikely to impact
0
6 / To raise educational achievement and improve skills across the City / Unlikely to impact
0 / Unlikely to impact
0
7 / To reduce crime and the fear of crime / Proposals within the area are likely to exhibit secure by design, but to differing degrees
+ / The masterplan ensures the whole area is developed to high design standards, ensuring safety
++
8 / To reduce the impacts of climate change and our contribution to the causes / Likely to incorporate sustainability, but standards may differ
+ / The design specification places sustainability at the top of its agenda, incorporated as part of principles.
++
9 / To make better use of our resources / Unlikely to impact
+ / Emphasis on sustainability with greater understanding of overall impacts