Embedded Files
**WARNING**
This webpage has been converted from Classic Google Sites to the new version of Google Sites.
All the data should be here but the layout has not been tidied up.
Links are underlined but the text is black rather than blue.
Core Strategy - Pre-Submission Draft
Return to the top level Core Strategy page.
The consultation will take place between October 14th and November 25th.
There will be drop-in sessions across the county and a leaflet has been delivered to every home - see the leaflet here.
These details are based on the documents approved by the Council’s Cabinet on September 29th.
Summary of Comments
Summary of Comments
The key question is about the soundness of the plan:
Local Planning Authorities should submit a plan for examination which is considered to be ‘sound’.
To be sound, the plan must be: positively prepared; justified; effective; and consistent with national policy
Do you consider the Plan has met these tests?
As of January 23rd, 1,848 comments from 390 people have been processed.
This compares to 11,737/1,100 at Issues & Options, 4,348/608 at Preferred Options 1 and 12,138/1,922 at Preferred Options 2 and 8,749/1,261 at Full Draft Plan.
Of the 1,848 comments, 1,341 (73%) say the plan is not sound.
By comparison, in the Durham Pre-Submission Draft 85% of the 4,239 comments said their plan was not sound.
Purpose and Scope
Purpose and Scope
It is an updated version of the "Full Draft Plan", taking account of comments received, including advice on policy wording received from statutory bodies, as well as updated national policy and guidance.
It has also been necessary to update some aspects of the evidence base, and changes have been made to policies where required.
This is the final stage of consultation before the Core Strategy is submitted to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government for Independent Examination.
It is a formal, statutory stage in the production of the Core Strategy, as set out in Regulations.
For this stage responses must be based around the 'Tests of Soundness' that require the Core Strategy to be ‘Positively Prepared’, 'Justified', 'Effective' and consistent with national policy.
To be positively prepared, the Core Strategy must be:
• Prepared based on a strategy which seeks to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements; and
• Consistent with achieving sustainable development.
To be justified, the Core Strategy must be:
• Founded on a robust and credible evidence base; and
• The most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.
To be effective, the Core Strategy must be:
• Deliverable;
• Flexible;
• Based on effective joint working on cross-boundary strategic priorities; and
• Able to be monitored.
To be consistent with national policy, the Core Strategy must:
• Accord with the National Planning Policy Framework and other national planning policies
Pre-Submission Draft Compared to Final Draft Plan
Pre-Submission Draft Compared to Final Draft Plan
Unofficial map showing how much of Longhorsley Parish is protected by the Green Belt extension defined in the Pre-Submission Draft:
Other changes
Other changes
Ponteland is now identified as a Main Town rather than a Service Centre
[There is an additional consultation on the Ponteland Supplementary Planning document]
Amendments to sites that are proposed to be removed from the Green Belt in Hexham, Ponteland and Prudhoe.
Revisions to the policy approach to housing for older people and vulnerable groups as a result of changes in national guidance that no longer includes ‘lifetime homes’ standards.
However, the policy has been strengthened to require developers to demonstrate how proposals have considered the needs of older people and vulnerable groups.
Longhorsley Settlement Boundary
Extract from 7.59
An inset is proposed for Longhorsley which is based on the settlement boundary identified in the Castle Morpeth Local Plan but amended to reflect recent planning consents granted in the village.
This inset boundary is included within Appendix D.
The settlement boundary is defined in Figure D.12
The Castle Morpeth boundary already included the Normandy Terrace site.
The Core Strategy boundary includes the recently approved Reivers Gate and Shoulder of Mutton sites.
It does not include the Church View West or Whitegates West sites.
Extract from Figure D.12:
Drop-in sessions
Drop-in sessions
Drop-in sessions have been arranged in 23 locations, our closest being:
See full list of drop-ins hereBack to top
Evidence base and legal compliance documents
Evidence base and legal compliance documents
A substantial amount of evidence based studies have been used to inform the Pre-Submission Core Strategy.
A lot of the evidence work is already published on the Council’s website; all of the updated evidence documents will be available at the start of the consultation.
In addition to the evidence base work, a number of legal compliance documents also accompany the Pre Submission Core Strategy.
These documents are available in the [Supporting Documents] tab of the consultation.
The key documents are included in the Pre-Submission Documents below.
One of these documents is EB06 - Five Year Supply of Deliverable Sites 2015-2020 Report.
This table compared the 2014-19 Plan with the 2015-20 Plan and shows area detail for the 2015-20 Plan.
[Click here for a PDF version - then zoom in to see it full screen.]
This table shows the breakdown of Longhorsley's contribution to the Five Year Supply Plan.
[Click here for a PDF version - then zoom in to see it full screen.]
Nov 2nd update: The 2015 SHLAA had reclasified Whitegates West as "Not suitable for housing".
Timetable
Timetable
The planned adoption date has change with each consultation:
Pre-Submission Draft Documents
Pre-Submission Draft Documents
To view, print or download a document - View the document and then use the print or download icons -
Longhorsley Supplement.pdf - 20 A5 pages
EB07b - Northumberland SHLAA - Interim - October 2015 - Suitable and Not Suitable sites.pdf - SHLAA spreadsheet as PDF 65 pages
05a - Consultation leaflet.pdf - 1 page
04b - Response Form - PDF version.pdf - 4 pages
Page updated
Google Sites
Report abuse