The Stage 2 hearings as part of the examination of the Council’s draft local plan have now completed. Details of what was discussed and recordings of the individual sessions are available on the Council’s website. The outcome of the examination process, including the Forum’s recommendations and whether the Inspector will require changes to the Local Plan will not be known until Spring.
The examination was carried out by Inspector David Spencer BA(Hons) DipTP MRTPI who was appointed by the Secretary of State. At the final session held on Wednesday the Inspector complimented the Forum members who had attended the hearings to present our case. He said:
“I would like to place on record the quality of the submissions to the examination from East Boldon. I know that they are not here now, but I thought Mr Hutchinson, Mr Thompson and Mr Butler articulated themselves well at the hearings. They were clear, considered, concise and constructive in what they were seeking. I may not necessarily agree with everything they are looking for but I thought it is exactly what examiners look for in terms of how people should conduct themselves. They have served their community proud.”
Representatives from the Forum presented their case at the following sessions which are available on YouTube:
In Stage 1 of the hearings held in July last year, we told the Inspector that we opposed any building on the green belt, were concerned about the total number of houses being proposed for our village and reflected the concerns of the community over the impact of extra cars that would result from such numbers.
In Stage 2 we have reinforced those arguments focusing on the issues set out below and making the case for the policies in the Neighbourhood Plan to be reflected in the Council’s Local Plan.
Local Plan (LP) Policy 17 – Older People’s Housing
We argued that specific provision for housing for the elderly should be provided within the sites identified in LP Policy SP7 where it has been demonstrated that there is a need. A specific need for this type of accommodation was identified in the East Boldon Neighbourhood Plan, and without there being a specific requirement, developers would be unlikely to provide this type of accommodation. This is particularly relevant for the proposed 263 house development next to Boker Lane.
The Inspector agreed with this principle and asked that the Council should use the main housing allocations in LP Policy SP7 to specify where housing for the elderly should be provided, Including site GA2 next to Boker Lane.
LP Policy 18 – Affordable Housing
In Policy 18.3iv (Affordable Housing) of the latest version of the LP, the percentage of affordable housing applying to developments in East Boldon was reduced to 25% from the 30% which had applied in the previous Regulation 19 version. The percentage for Cleadon Village remained at 30%. We found this difficult to understand and argued that the percentage for East Boldon should return to 30% as the difference in market value of similar properties in East Boldon and Cleadon was marginal. The need for affordable housing in our area was also supported by the Housing Needs Assessment in the Neighbourhood Plan.
Our evidence along with evidence provided by the Council’s consultant who had carried out the exercise which resulted in the difference persuaded the Inspector to ask the Council to consider revising the percentage of affordable housing in East Boldon to 30%
LP Policy 19 – Housing Mix
We explained that the housing needs assessment (HNA) for East Boldon referred to in the Neighbourhood Plan gives a clear indication of the housing mix best suited to the needs of local residents. Reference should therefore be made to this document and the types of housing required within Policy 19 of the Local Plan if the needs of residents are to be truly met. If left to developers, the needs of local residents in relation to the types of house available will not be met, as evidenced by the proposed development at Cleadon Lane.
The Inspector asked the Council to give due consideration to the Neighbourhood Plan in relation to housing mix.
LP Policy 16.2 – Housing Supply & Delivery
As drafted, this policy provides for at least 263 new homes within the Forum area. 263 is the exact number proposed for the site at Boker Lane (North Farm), and ignores the 202 at Cleadon Lane and 9 at Mayflower Glass which are in the pipeline. We argued that the figure in the local plan was misleading and a greater number of houses were actually proposed by the Council. Along with the Cleadon Lane and Mayflower Glass site the figure was 465, and for clarity, that is the figure that should be identified.
The Inspector put this to the Council and they agreed to look at amending the housing requirement for East Boldon.
Housing Trajectory (pace of development of new homes)
We supported the Council’s proposal to achieve a stepped trajectory for the delivery of new homes (completion of units over a greater number of years) in order to allow the parallel delivery of necessary infrastructure and/or mitigation measures. This would ease the pressure on local services and infrastructure if the site at Boker Lane goes ahead.
The Inspector agreed with this approach.
Policy 50 – Social & Community Infrastructure
We argued that this policy isn’t sound as it doesn’t contain sufficient detail about how appropriate social & community infrastructure (School places, health & community facilities etc) will be provided to cater for the impact of new development in East Boldon. Our Neighbourhood Plan (NP) contains specific policies covering this. Policy 50 should include an acknowledgement of such policies within the NP.
The Inspector asked the Council to consider adding this requirement to Policy 50.
Policy 51.2.vii – “Working with Network Rail to assess the implications of full barrier operation at Tileshed and Boldon level crossings.”
In the absence of any current assessment by the Council, we set out in detail the likely implications for traffic flows resulting from the development of new housing in and around East Boldon, including an appendix showing the impact of proposed developments on all the main junctions including Tilesheds crossing and Station Road. This showed that in total, 1,396 dwellings will be built over the next seven or eight years which are likely to have a significant impact on the traffic flows on both of these level crossings.
The Council appears to exempt itself from responsibility for dealing with this issue and puts the onus onto Network Rail. We argued that the Council should be accountable and must take responsibility for ensuring that appropriate infrastructure is in place to deal with the impact of new housing that it has included in its Local Plan.
The Inspector said that he would reflect on this request.
Policy 47 – Design Principles
We expressed our concern that the Council had not adopted the Nationally Prescribed Space Standards (NDSS) for new dwellings in Policy 47 of the LP.
We noted that it is those properties with a smaller number of bedrooms that are more affected by substandard or constrained floor areas than those with a larger number of bedrooms, and where this is the case, it is often the bedroom size that is compromised. These are the very properties that are more likely to be occupied by residents who are affected by mobility issues, and the same properties are more likely to be allocated as affordable and for social rent for young families. The inclusion of NDSS as an explicit requirement would ensure that there is enough space for an adequate amount of furniture, and enough room for the user to negotiate that furniture.
This position seems completely at odds with the weight of the evidence presented in the local plan concerning the needs of South Tyneside’s residents, and flies in the face of advice from the RTPI, RIBA and Institute of Housing. We also noted that some neighbouring Councils have adopted NDSS.
Despite the arguments against this put forward by the representatives of developers present, the Inspector asked the Council to consider reflecting the Forum’s comments in Policy 47.
Policy 36 – Protecting trees, woodland and hedgerows
The subtext of policy 36 (11.39) states development should ensure that streets are tree lined, but neither policy 36 or 47 explicitly calls for this to happen.
We argued that if trees are so important to the street scene, combating climate change, providing connectivity and habitat, one of these policies should specifically call for their inclusion. Unless tree lined streets are planned for from the outset, it is generally accepted that this will not happen further into the design process.
The developers argued that site constraints often prevented this and the Council argued that the LP already included a presumption in favour of tree lined streets unless it was demonstrated that it was not possible.
Design Codes
The LP as currently drafted doesn’t include a Design Code for new developments. When we prepared the Neighbourhood Plan for East Boldon, it incorporated a specific Design Code that should apply to new developments.
We argued that the last sentence of Policy 47could be expanded to say that where a Neighbourhood Plan included a Design Code, that should apply to new developments within the NP area.
The Forum understands that for the design code in the Neighbourhood Plan to carry weight (paragraph 129 NPPF), the local plan should reference this in a policy, in this case, Policy 47.
The Inspector said that he would reflect on this proposal and issue guidance in his written response to the hearings
If you live or work in the East Boldon Forum area then you are welcome to join the Forum. Please get in touch with us.
If you wish to contact us for any reason please leave your details on the Contact Us page.