Gateshead Unitary Development Plan
General Development Polices
Topic Paper
CD/TOP/02
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
Pg. 3
2. Development Control Policy Context
Pg. 4
3. Planning Obligations Policy Context
Pg. 6
4. Mixed-Use Policy Context
Pg. 8
Appendix 1: The range of uses encouraged to be permitted on Pg. 23
Mixed-Use sites.
Appendix 2: Mixed Use Tables
Pg. 25
Table 1: Sequential assessment of sites based upon Pg. 25
paragraph 2.44 and Table 2 Annex A of PPS 6
Table 2: Designated MU sites where hotel development is Pg. 27
proposed to be permitted, categorised by type of location
Table 3: MU sites assessed against the sequential approach Pg. 28
of DP1 of RSS and Policy 3 of emerging RSS
Appendix 3: List of Core Documents
Pg. 30
2
1. Introduction
1.1. The purpose of this topic paper is to explain the approach taken in Part II: Introduction and
General Development Polices chapter of the Re-Deposit Replacement UDP. This paper has
been compiled in light of the on-going review of the current UDP, which was adopted in 1998.
The Council will refer to the paper, where appropriate, in support of rebuttals to specific
objections, which have been made to the replacement plan. The section was written so as to
provide an update of the current local policy framework, taking into account changes in national
and regional policy.
1.2. This paper will deal with the three policy areas covered by the chapter, namely;



Development Control Policies
Planning Obligations Policies
Mixed Use Policies
1.3. These policies follow on from the General Strategic policies in Chapter 4 [STR1-STR21]
which set out the strategic framework for the plan, which was formulated following consultation
on key issues and options, workshops and the agreement of a preferred development strategy.
The main aim of the plan is to promote development where it is needed and in the most
sustainable manner possible (4.2). In particular policy STR1 refers to the spatial distribution of
development, which should benefit rural as well as urban locations and help to sustain local
services and facilities.
3
2. Development Control Policy Context
2.1. Development Control may be broadly defined as the process through which the Council
determines whether a proposal for development should be granted planning permission, taking
into account the development plan and any other material considerations. It is also the ‘
process whereby a local planning authority manages, shapes, and considers the merits of a
planning application and whether it should be given permission with regard to the development
plan’.[see CD/GOV/53] Every aspect of the development control process is covered by the full
range of relevant Planning Policy Guidance Notes [PPGs] and Planning Policy Statements
[PPSs].
Approach to Development Control in the Re-Deposit Draft Replacement UDP (January
2006) [CD/DP/03]
2.2. Under the Deposit Replacement Unitary Development Plan (June 2004) there was a
generic development control policy (GDC1), which covered aspects of the Environment and
Highways & Transport. Within the Re-Deposit Replacement Unitary Development Plan
(January 2006) this policy has been replaced with five new development control policies. This
was done to reduce the complexity of the policy and to avoid unnecessary duplication. The new
policies follow on from the strategic policies contained within Chapter 4 of the emerging plan
and are outlined as follows;
DC1: Environment
2.3. This policy specifies the criteria, which would need to be adhered to for any proposed new
development not to adversely affect the built and/or natural environment. The criteria range
from the incorporation of’ landscape, natural and historic features into the design and layout’ of
new schemes to; encouraging development, which ‘contributes to the local economy, tourist
attractions and employment opportunities’.
DC2: Residential Amenity
2.4. This policy specifies the criteria, which would need to be adhered to for any proposed new
development not to adversely affect residential amenity. The criteria range from not having an
adverse impact on the ‘amenity or character of an area, and does not cause undue disturbance
to nearby residents or conflict with other adjoining uses’ to; proposals not being ‘within 50
metres, in the case of residential buildings, or 10 metres, in the case of residential gardens, of
the boundary of a landfill site producing, or with the potential to produce, large volumes of
methane gas unless, following investigation, the applicant can safeguard the future users or
occupiers of the site’.
DC3: Advertisements
2.5. This policy outlines the one criterion relating to the control of advertisements and states
that ‘Advertisement Consent will be granted where the advertisement would not be prejudicial
to amenity or public safety’.
4
DC4: Highways and Transport
2.6. This policy specifies the criteria, which would need to be adhered to for any proposed new
development not to adversely affect highway safety or amenity. The criteria range from the
securing of safe access to the development site by all modes of transport to car parking
standards for new developments. [also see SPG15/IPA11]
DC5: A1/A194(M)
2.7. This policy deals with the control of development, which may have an impact on the
A1/A194(M) trunk road. The Council indicates that it will work with the Highways Agency,
developers and other interested parties to ensure that both the ‘regeneration potential of land
identified along the main trunk road corridors is maximised’; and the ‘impacts of generated
traffic on the trunk road network are minimised’.
2.8. In addition to support these objectives the Council will develop ‘effective travel plans for all
developments which could have a significant effect on the trunk road network’; and require
‘appropriate financial contributions from developers to provide sustainable transport
improvements, in line with Policy PO1’.
2.9. DC5 also highlights concerns, which the Council has in relation to the power of the
Highways Agency to arbitrarily direct refusal on planning applications affecting the trunk road,
which ‘poses a threat to the effective development of a large number of sites within Gateshead’
the implications of which would lead to;
2.10. The ‘undermining the successful regeneration of Gateshead, and the provision of
increased employment in sustainable locations’; the prevention of the ‘re-use of brownfield sites
in accessible locations’ and; the addition to ‘overall car dependence as development locates to
other, less sustainable sites on less heavily trafficked parts of the network’. It is considered that
these issues ‘represent a significant challenge to the Borough in securing its sustainable longterm regeneration’.
2.11. The Council and Highways Agency have jointly commissioned a study to determine the
likely traffic generation of development sites in the MetroCentre area and look at how this
generated traffic can be managed to minimise impact on the trunk road. Similarly, both bodies
are working with landowners and businesses at Team Valley to address the same issues. In
addition travel plans should be developed within the agreed zone of influence ‘for all but the
most minor of planning applications’.
2.12. The policy also mentions that there is a validation checklist outlined in appendix 18 which
details the information that must be provided and the information that may be required for all
types of planning application. In addition it mentions the need for Design and Access
Statements required by the 2005 amendment to the Town and Country Planning (General
Development Procedure) Order, guidance for which can be found in Appendix 16.
5
Conclusion
2.13. The overall thrust of the development control policies is to promote sustainable
development across the borough and to protect and enhance the urban, natural and historic
environment to provide a more desirable, cleaner and safer place to live. These policies seek to
implement the wider strategic policies at a more focused local level in the interests of the
proper planning and development of the Borough.
3. Planning Obligations Policy Context
3.1. Planning Obligations may be defined as ‘a legal agreement between a planning authority
and a developer, or offered unilaterally by a developer, ensuring that certain extra works
related to a development are undertaken’. It may also be defined as an ‘agreement under
section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act entered into regarding the use or
development of land’. [see CD/GOV/53] An obligation can either be made by agreement
between the local planning authority and a developer, or by a unilateral undertaking by the
developer. Obligations can be used to enhance the quality of development proposals.
Circular 05/2005 Planning Obligations [CD/GOV/47]
3.2. Circular 05/2005 provides guidance on the use of Section 106 agreements as follows;
3.3. ‘Section 106(1) provides that anyone with an interest in land may enter into a planning
obligation enforceable by the local planning authority identified in the instrument creating the
obligation. Such an obligation may be created by agreement or by the person with the interest
making an undertaking. The use of the term "planning obligation" reflects the fact that
obligations may be created other than by agreement between the parties (that is, by the
developer making an undertaking). Such obligations may restrict development or use of the
land; require operations or activities to be carried out in, on, under or over the land; require the
land to be used in any specified way; or require payments to be made to the authority either in
a single sum or periodically’.
Delivering Affordable Housing through Planning Policy (ODPM 2002) [CD/GOV/52]
3.4. For example planning obligations may be used to provide affordable housing through legal
agreements and the use of commuted sums. However this is usually only in exceptional
circumstances.
3.5. Paragraph 9.1.1 states ‘Government policy is clear that provision of affordable housing
should normally be on site. If a site is not suitable for affordable housing then there should be
no requirement for an affordable housing contribution off site. Only in exceptional
circumstances will financial contributions be acceptable.’
3.6. Paragraph 9.3.3 makes the point that generally the acceptance of commuted sums
appears to be for one of three main reasons:

the overall economics of the scheme mean that provision of affordable housing on site is not
financially viable;
6


the local authority would prefer a financial contribution because a shortage of SHG (Social
Housing Grant) means that resources from a number of sites must be pooled in order to make
development feasible on one site; and
the site is capable of providing affordable housing but the location is not the most appropriate
one for meeting housing need.
Approach to Planning Obligations in the Re-Deposit Draft Replacement UDP (January
2006) [CD/DP/03]
3.7. The planning obligations policy contained within the Re-Deposit Draft Replacement UDP
(January 2006) follows on from the strategic policy STR21 contained within Chapter 4 of the
emerging plan.
3.8. Policy STR21 states that the purpose of planning obligations is to ‘ensure that any
development proposals do not impose costs that others have to fund, due to an overburdening
of facilities or infrastructure’. The policy also encourages the identification and inclusion of
‘supporting infrastructure, services and amenities’ as part of an appropriate development
proposal which would also be ‘commensurate with the scale of’ and ‘reasonably related to’ the
proposal.
3.9. Policy PO1 outlines the type and level of financial contributions, which would normally be
required from developers in order to ‘meet needs created by their developments’. These needs
would either be unable to be satisfied on site, or would not be directly provided for by the
developer, or would need to be ‘provided or maintained over a longer timescale’. The level of
financial contribution would be ‘proportionate to the size and nature of the development in
question’.
3.10. Policy PO2 relates to the provision of targeted employment and training opportunities
aimed primarily at the unemployed and underskilled. This would be facilitated through Section
106 legal agreements, which would also apply to the sustainable delivery of construction
materials to be used in such projects.
Conclusion
3.11. The overall thrust of the planning obligations policies is to secure appropriate and
adequate funding in order to facilitate the provision of essential public services and utilities
throughout the Borough.
7
4. Mixed Use Policy Context
4.1. A wide variety of definitions for mixed-use development are in existence which may leave
the term in a slightly ambiguous position, however for the purposes of this paper it may be
broadly defined as development, which makes a positive contribution to the urban environment,
(particularly in town centres) where it provides essential facilities and activities in one
convenient location which is sustainably accessed by many means of transport both private
and public. A well thought out mixed-use scheme will add to the vitality and viability of a town
centre and its design will help to create an attractive space within the urban realm. Offices,
bars, cafes and restaurants along with a proportionally appropriate amount of residential units
can create a vibrant and robust local community and micro-economy.
4.2. Mixed-use development emerged as an issue for land use planning policy during the
1990s, based on an inherent belief on the part of public policy makers that mixed-use
development will contribute to a variety of objectives, including housing provision, revitalised
town centres and more sustainable urban environments. (see Table 1 below)1
Date
Nov-96
Encourages development where it can be well served by public
transport and promotes higher density and mixed-use
development as a means of making efficient use of urban land
PPG13 Transport
reducing the need to travel
Our Future Homes, Opportunity, White Paper on housing need and the mechanisms on satisfying
Choice, Responsibility
this housing need. Social housing an important theme.
Household Growth: Where shall we Government discussion paper on meeting the demand of 4.4
Live?
million additional households 1991-2016
Feb-97
PPG1 General Policy and
Principles
Stresses significance of sustainable development and mixed-use
development, especially in town centres. Emphasises plan-led
system to give firm guidance on quality of development
Planning for the Communities of
the Future
Circular 6/98 Planning and
Affordable Housing
Emphasises the contribution of mixed-use/mixed-tenure
development in meeting housing need, assisting urban
regeneration and supporting public transport
Raises the issue of mixed tenure housing developments in
schemes with reference to both mixed use and mixed tenure
PPG13 Transport
Encourages the integration of transport and planning policies
and reducing the need to travel, through re-use of town/city
centre land and mixed-use development
PPG12 Development Plans
Integration of sustainability issues into plans, relationship
between plan and other documents such as local transport plans
and new procedures for preparation, management and
consultation.
PPG3 Housing
Strategic overview stating commitment to mixed-use
development, including housing to bring new life into towns and
cities and promote sustainability. Also discusses mixed
communities, affordable housing, re-use of urban land and
buildings, reallocating employment and other land to housing,
optimising urban capacity and CPOs.
Mar-94
Jun-95
Feb-98
Apr-98
Oct-99
Jan-00
Mar-00
1
Title
Table 1: National Guidance on Mixed-Use Development
Content
Mixed Use Development, Practice and Potential, ODPM 2002 [CD/MU/01]
8
4.3. The mixed-use theme has been continued in new Planning Policy Statements (PPS),
which have been issued resulting from the implementation of the Planning & Compulsory
Purchase Act 2004.
PPS1: Delivering Sustainable Development, ODPM (2005) [CD/GOV/01]
4.4. Sustainable development is a core principle underpinning planning, and encompasses
protection of the environment, delivery of an innovative economy with high levels of
employment and social inclusion (spatial approach) (para4). The planning system has an
important role to play in the creation of sustainable socially inclusive communities.
4.5. Development Plans should (27): Promote urban and rural regeneration through higher
density mixed-use development on previously developed land, and utilisation of underused or
vacant property/land; Identify sites in existing centres for retail, leisure, office and other
development which attract large numbers of people, to promote their vitality and viability, and
encourage accessibility by non-car modes; Take into account the needs of different parts of the
community (inclusive); and Deliver safe and attractive places to live.
4.6. Policies should afford protection to valued townscapes and countryside, encourage good
design and the use of renewable energy, encourage measures to minimise flood risk, mitigate
the effects of climate change and encourage the sustainable management of waste (an
integrated approach) (22). Government guidance and best practice generally promotes mixeduse as a sustainable and viable option for urban centre sites.
PPG3 Housing [CD/GOV/03]
4.7. Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) are encouraged to ‘review all their non-housing
allocations when reviewing their development plan and consider whether some of this land
might better be used for housing or mixed use developments’ (Par 42). LPAs are also
encouraged to ‘promote more sustainable residential environments, both within and outside
existing urban areas’ by promoting mixed-use development (Par 46).
4.8. The use of housing as a tool to increase the viability and vitality of town centres as a part
of mixed-use development on previously developed land, paragraphs 49-51 specifically refer to
the promotion of mixed-use development to achieve this and specify how LPAs should facilitate
mixed use;
 encouraging more housing, including affordable housing, in town centres by, for example,




converting space above shops and vacant commercial buildings;
identifying appropriate sites in development plans;
preparing development briefs for sites likely to become available for development;
assembling sites for redevelopment; and
adopting flexible planning standards for car parking and density which facilitate such
developments.
9
Consultation Paper on a New Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3) – Housing
[CD/GOV/03b]
4.9. Local planning authorities when formulating development plans are encouraged to ‘allocate
sufficient land and buildings for housing or mixed use development to deliver the first five years
of the housing trajectory, taking into account a windfall allowance only where it is not possible
to allocate sufficient land’ (Par 12). In addition it states that ‘the priority for development is
developable brownfield land. Local planning authorities should review all their non-housing
allocations when preparing or reviewing their site allocation development plan document and
consider whether some of this land might be more appropriately used for housing or mixed use
development.’ (Par 15) Additionally Local planning authorities are encouraged to provide an
allocation or broad identification of housing supply for a further ten-year period (for further
information refer to core documents CD/GOV/03d and CD/GOV/03e).
RPG1: Regional Planning Guidance for the North-East [CD/REG/01]
4.10. The Locational Strategy outlined in Regional Planning Guidance for the North East
(RPG1) establishes the need to adopt a sequential approach to the identification of land for
development (par 2.54). Policy DP1 sets out the hierarchy of sites for a sequential approach to
the location of development in sustainable locations.
4.11. Policy DP2 sets out the criteria, which should be taken into account in assessing the
suitability of land for development in accordance with the sequential approach, set out in Policy
DP1. One criterion relates specifically to “the suitability of sites for mixed use development”.
4.12. Policy TC3 states that development plans should “consider the scope for new or
replacement district and local centres and the criteria to be applied in considering possible
locations and, where appropriate, contain specific proposals for their development. Any such
proposals should be an integral part of an appropriate scale, mixed-use development and
should be assessed against the strategy in the Development Plan”.
4.13. Policy T2 deals with the design of development and the promotion of mixed-use
developments within urban centres. The policy supports the principle of mixed-use stating that
a key aim should be to “promote mixed-use developments, well served by public transport, to
reduce journey lengths and ensure that the best use is made of transport infrastructure and
services”.
4.14. In relation to traffic and the movement of people RPG1 mentions that strategies should
also “promote mixed-use developments that can reduce the overall need to travel and ensure
that the most efficient use is made of transport infrastructure and services. Demand
management measures should be used to encourage public transport use and cycling and
walking in areas where car use gives rise to environmental, safety or congestion problems”.
Submission Draft Regional Spatial Strategy (RSS) (2005) [CD/REG/03]
4.15. The spatial strategy for the future development of the region includes promoting an urban
and rural renaissance, sustainable development, a sequential approach to allocations and an
appropriate phasing and plan, monitor manage mechanism. The Locational Strategy supports
the realisation of the major assets and opportunities that exist in the North East, and identifies a
polycentric settlement pattern and two city region areas within the region. (Par 2.3)
10
Tyne and Wear City Region
4.16. Having no definitive boundary and consisting of a polycentric settlement pattern including
the core areas of Newcastle and Sunderland and a further major centre in Durham City, and a
wide hinterland, the City Region consists of around 1.6million people and offers a distinctive
quality of life, including urban and rural areas and regional and sub-regional shopping centres.
Tyne and Wear and Durham City provide the major urban living environments and centres for
employment, services and facilities. Strategic Public Transport hubs, including Newcastle City,
and local public transport hubs, including Central Gateshead and Metro stations, should be the
focus for higher density development (Par 2.30).
PPS6 – Planning for Town Centres [CD/GOV/06]
4.17. The Government’s main objective in relation to town centres is to ‘to promote their vitality
and viability’ (par 1.3). It states that this should be done by planning for the growth and
development of existing centres whilst promoting and enhancing them by ‘focusing
development in such centres and encouraging a wide range of services in a good environment,
accessible to all.’
Other important objectives include;
4.18. The delivery of more sustainable patterns of development which ensure that suitable
locations are fully exploited through higher density mixed-use development whilst promoting
sustainable transport choices (par 1.4); and
4.19. The promotion of high quality, inclusive design which would ‘improve the quality of the
public realm and open spaces, protect and enhance the architectural and historic heritage of
centres, provide a sense of place and a focus for the community and for civic activity and
ensure that town centres provide an attractive, accessible and safe environment for
businesses, shoppers and residents’ (par 1.5)
4.20. The main town centre uses are identified as follows (par 1.8):




retail (including warehouse clubs and factory outlet centres);
leisure, entertainment facilities, and the more intensive sport and recreation uses 6(including
cinemas, restaurants, drive-through restaurants, bars and pubs, night-clubs, casinos, health
and fitness centres, indoor bowling centres, and bingo halls);
offices, both commercial and those of public bodies; and
arts, culture and tourism (theatres, museums, galleries and concert halls, hotels, and
conference facilities).
4.21. Housing is seen as being an important element in most mixed-use, multi-storey
developments. (Par 1.9)
4.22. To promote vital and viable town centres development should be focused in existing
centres in order to strengthen and regenerate them. In order to do this local planning
authorities are encouraged to (see par 2.1);

actively promote growth and manage change in town centres;
11


define a network and a hierarchy of centres each performing their appropriate role to meet the
needs of their catchments; and
adopt a proactive, plan-led approach to planning for town centres, through regional and local
planning.
4.23. Paragraph 2.20 states that ‘Local planning authorities should formulate planning policies
which encourage well-designed, and, where appropriate, higher-density, multi-storey
development within and around existing centres, including the promotion of mixed-use
development and mixed-use areas’.
4.24. Residential or office uses above ground floor retail, leisure or other facilities are
encouraged within town centre locations (Par 2.21) and it is stated that ‘A diversity of uses in
centres makes an important contribution to their vitality and viability’ and that a variety of uses
operating at different times of the day and evening can make town centres ‘more attractive’ to
local people and visitors alike. Local Planning Authorities are urged to ‘encourage
diversification of uses’ in town centres and ensure that tourism, leisure & cultural activities are
dispersed throughout them. (Par 2.22)
Managing the Evening and Night-time Economy
4.25. Local planning authorities are encouraged to formulate planning policies, which help to
promote and manage the evening and night-time economy by facilitating appropriate uses
which cater for and appeal to a wide range of social and age groups i.e. cinemas, theatres,
restaurants, public houses, bars, nightclubs and cafes. (Par 2.23) The ‘cumulative impact’ on
the character and functionality of the town centre should also be taken into account. (Par 2.24).
4.26. Local Planning Authorities are encouraged to ‘actively plan for growth’ and to ‘manage
change in town centres over the period of their development plan’ by (Par 2.3);






selecting appropriate existing centres to accommodate the identified need for growth by:
making better use of existing land and buildings, including, where appropriate, redevelopment;
where necessary, extending the centre.
managing the role and function of existing centres by, for example, promoting and developing
a specialist or new role and encouraging specific types of uses in some centres; and
planning for new centres of an appropriate scale in areas of significant growth or where
there are deficiencies in the existing network of centres.
Sequential approach
4.27. A sequential approach to site selection for allocation within town centres is encouraged
requiring that suitable locations should be considered in the following order (see Par 2.44);



first, locations in appropriate existing centres where suitable sites or buildings for conversion
are, or are likely to become, available within the development plan document period, taking
account of an appropriate scale of development in relation to the role and function of the
centre; and then
edge-of-centre locations, with preference given to sites that are or will be well-connected to the
centre; and then
out-of-centre sites, with preference given to sites which are or will be well served by a choice of
means of transport and which are close to the centre and have a high likelihood of forming
links with the centre.
12
4.28. When selecting sites for allocation in development plan documents local planning
authorities are encouraged to take the following considerations into account (Par 2.51);




Physical regeneration: the benefits of developing on previously-developed sites which may
require remediation;
Employment: the net additional employment opportunities that would arise in a locality as a
result of a proposed allocation, particularly in deprived areas;
Economic growth: the increased investment in an area, both direct and indirect, arising from
the proposed allocation and improvements in productivity, for example arising from economies
of scale; and
Social inclusion: this can be defined in broad terms and may, in addition to the above, include
other considerations, such as increasing the accessibility of a range of services and facilities to
all groups.
4.29. When monitoring the vitality and viability of town centres local planning authorities should
collect data on the following key indicators (Par 4.4);










The diversity of main town centre uses (by number, type and amount of floorspace): the
amount of space in use for different functions – such as offices; shopping; leisure, cultural and
entertainment activities; pubs, cafes and restaurants; and, hotels;
The amount of retail, leisure and office floorspace in edge-of-centre and out-of-centre
locations;
The potential capacity for growth or change of centres in the network: opportunities for
centres to expand or consolidate, typically measured in the amount of land available for new or
more intensive forms of town centre development;
Retailer representation and intentions to change representation: existence and changes
in representation of types of retailer, including street markets, and the demand of retailers
wanting to come into the centre, or to change their representation in the centre, or to reduce or
close their representation;
Shopping rents: pattern of movement in Zone A rents within primary shopping areas (i.e. the
rental value for the first 6 metres depth of floorspace in retail units from the shop window);
The proportion of vacant street level property: vacancies can arise even in the strongest
town centres, and this indicator must be used with care. Vacancies in secondary frontages and
changes to other uses will also be useful indicators;
Commercial yields on non-domestic property (i.e. the capital value in relation to the
expected market rental): demonstrates the confidence of investors in the long-term
profitability of the centre for retail, office and other commercial developments. This indicator
should be used with care;
Pedestrian flows (footfall): a key indicator of the vitality of shopping streets, measured by the
numbers and movement of people on the streets, in different parts of the centre at different
times of the day and evening, who are available for businesses to attract into shops,
restaurants or other facilities;
Accessibility: ease and convenience of access by a choice of means of travel, including – the
quality, quantity and type of car parking; the frequency and quality of public transport services
and the range of customer origins served; and, the quality of provision for pedestrians, cyclists
and disabled people and the ease of access from main arrival points to the main attractions;
Customer and residents’ views and behaviour: regular surveys will help authorities in
monitoring and evaluating the effectiveness of town centre improvements and in setting further
priorities. Interviews in the town centre and at home can be used to establish views of both
users and non-users of the centre, including the views of residents living in or close to the
centre. This information could also establish the degree of linked trips;
13


Perception of safety and occurrence of crime: should include views and information on
safety and security, and where appropriate, information for monitoring the evening and nighttime economy; and
State of the town centre environmental quality: should include information on problems
(such as air pollution, noise, clutter, litter and graffiti) and positive factors (such as trees,
landscaping and open spaces).
Planning for the Communities of the Future, ODPM [CD/GOV/55]
4.30. This document represents a first major step in the Government's drive to make our towns
and cities more attractive and sustainable, and so reduce the need for development to spread
into the countryside (Par 1). It also strongly encourages the use of previously developed land
and brown field sites in particular for mixed-use development and identifies policy trends as
follows (see Par 55)



widespread support for some sort of sequential approach to identifying land for housing, and
some support for phasing the release of land;
acceptance of higher densities and mixed-use development, provided design quality could be
guaranteed - with specific support for terracedhousing;
strong support for improved land assembly and compulsory purchase order powers, in order
to help promote mixed uses, bring forward urban sites, and assemble land for new
settlements.
14
Mixed Use Development, Practice and Potential, ODPM 2002 [CD/MU/01]
4.31. The report was commissioned by the Office for the Deputy Prime Minister (ODPM) in
2002 and analysed ‘the potential and actual contribution of mixed-use development schemes
with a significant housing component to the revitalisation of town centres, and interrogated the
obstacles to implementation, with reference to twelve case studies.’
4.32. The case studies looked at were;












Portland Place, Ashton-under-Lyne
St Martin's Place, Dorking
Brook Green, Hammersmith
Cardinal House, Havant
Pex Development, Leicester
Smithfield Buildings, Manchester
St John's Gate, Middlesbrough
The Post Office Building, Newcastle-upon-Tyne
Calvergate, Norwich
Trivett Square, Nottingham
Comish Place & Brooklyn Works, Sheffield
Riverside Mill, Sowerby Bridge
4.33. All of the case studies in the report had an element of housing development and the most
common mix was found to be with offices whereas A3 uses such as pubs and restaurants were
present in 8 of the 12 case studies.
4.34. The report makes a clear distinction between development output and development
outcome. ‘The term 'output' refers to the individual developments or building blocks which make
up the town centre. The term 'outcome' refers to the broader scale aggregation, the totality of
the resulting environment.’ It goes on to say that ‘this is more than a semantic distinction. The
configuration of the individual components obviously plays an important role. But the location of
successful town centres involves a more holistic approach than focusing on the individual
outputs in terms of buildings and sites. This in turn has implications for the vision of what we
want to achieve in our town centres, and the mechanisms and techniques required to realise
this vision.’
Successful Mixed Use Development
4.35. The report notes that successful mixed-use either in an individual building or group of
buildings is ‘readily identifiable by a mix of functions which jointly activate the urban form’,
which can positively affect the socio-economic wellbeing of an area ‘often producing an
environment which is both attractive and sustainable’ which can enhance viability and generate
a powerful sense of place, providing choice, access and a ‘sense of being in an active and
dynamic urban setting’ creating a ‘critical mass and level of activity which is greater than the
sum of the individual uses, thereby making a critical contribution to location and character’.
4.36. Location is identified as a ‘crucial factor’, which increases the number of potential
destinations clustered together within walking distance of the town centre whilst still attracting
people from outside the centre. In addition it identifies the interaction of ground floor uses and
street activities as a ‘crucial indicator’ of a quality urban environment.
15
4.37. Town centre attractiveness is seen to refer to more than just the ‘visual impact’ and that
successful mixed-use is ‘characterised by a mix of function and activity’, and that its
attractiveness will be measured ‘by the degree to which the elements jointly activate the built
form at ground floor level and the immediate street environment in a positive and integrated
manner’.
Understanding the Contribution of Mixed-Use Development
4.38. According to the report the ‘variety of elements, users and activities inherent in mixed-use
development is crucial to the notion of vitality’ and that one of the most common forms of
variety is achieved within those developments which combine an element of residential, office
and retail usage.
4.39. The vitality of urban centres is seen as being ‘essential to their attractiveness’ and as a
characteristic which ‘mixed-use development seeks simultaneously to harness and enhance’.
Introducing a mixture of uses including a proportionally appropriate level of residential use can
‘stimulate the evening/weekend economy, and prevent 'dead' office zones and that a
streetscape with a variety of ‘small shops’ would tend to be ‘more lively and attractive than the
same street with a combination of multiple retail stores and offices’.
4.40. The term vitality refers to life and particularly in relation to urban centres this life is
‘represented by the presence of people’ and ‘also embraces the natural environment in the
form of plant life, and this provides an important element of the quality of the physical
environment’. In addition the role of people is of fundamental importance in that they represent
a physical presence, which can range from ‘liveliness’ to ‘non-active’ and everywhere in
between. It also points out that ‘the planned physical environment needs to cover all these,
exploiting the positive elements and mitigating the negative ones’ and that there is ‘a
fundamental inter-relationship between activity and attractiveness….. the challenge is to create
town centre environments which people want to visit and people enjoy being in’.
Diversifying the evening economy
4.41. The main aim of diversifying the economy is the extension of the town centre vitality for
example through longer opening hours for shops, pubs, restaurants and cafes. In addition to
the increased flexibility in the operation of town centre uses an essential ingredient are the
‘people around to patronise these facilities’. The mixture of town centre uses should be able to
attract patrons from outside the urban core as well as those who live nearby. The level of
vitality will largely depend on the mixture of uses and whether they can create a vibrant, lively
and buoyant local micro-economy. The type of vitality will depend on the type of housing in the
centre as the ‘mere existence of housing in the town centre does not alone ensure it….the
evening economy requires a population that chooses to go out in the evening, and has money
to spend. The younger professionals who choose to live in the town centre, have the resources
and the lifestyle, may well fall into that category. On the other hand the residents of affordable
housing schemes, who may be there more by necessity or chance than by choice, probably
have less scope or inclination to engage in an active evening/night-time social life’.
16
Environmental quality & appearance
4.42. The report states that ‘there are strong indications that mixed-use development can have
a significant impact on environmental quality and appearance. These can be important factors
in determining attractiveness. The challenge associated with the more complex planning and
design required for a mixed-use scheme may well provide a drive and spark which is reflected
in the quality of the resulting development. This derives first from the integration of different and
sometimes potentially conflicting uses into the same building or in a complex of buildings, and
secondly from the frequent need to incorporate or adapt some existing buildings’.
Barriers to Mixed-Use Development: Perception & Reality
4.43. A recurrent theme in the debate about mixed-use development is the existence of a
series of barriers or obstacles, which are believed to prevent or inhibit the delivery. Many
commonly-cited obstacles or barriers to the realisation of mixed-use development are
overstated. Where such obstacles do exist, they do not appear to be specific to mixed-use
development, but are more in the nature of routine development practice which affects both
mixed and single-use development alike.
The Property Market Perspective
4.44. The report also analysed mixed-use development from the perspective of the housing
market and the developers within it concluding that the buoyancy of the market along with the
plan-led system has largely encouraged developers ‘to turn their attention to town centre sites
and to become major deliverers of mixed-use development’ the take up of housing within mixed
use schemes has exceeded expectations and ‘the empirical evidence demonstrates that
affordable housing can be effectively incorporated in high-quality mixed-use schemes’.
However it did point out that ‘mixed-use development will only happen if and when it matches
the demands of the property market’ as most of the finance for mixed schemes comes from the
private sector.
4.45. Additionally the report mentions the fact that ‘securing funding support is the biggest
single problem for mixed-use development schemes and the most common reason for
schemes not getting off the ground. The property market tends to favour single-use schemes
since these usually generate surer, greater profit; but it will accept mixed use. In some
circumstances mixed use will be favoured due to a combination of location, site configuration,
and local property market characteristics. The quantum of development appears to be critical:
the larger the scheme, the greater the margin for incorporating additional, 'less profitable' uses’.
Promoting Mixed-Use Development
4.46. As stated previously in the report there is an important ‘conceptual distinction between
the mixed-use output and the mixed-use outcome. It is the outcome (a richly textured area
environment comprising a mix of uses and activities) rather than the output (a discrete
development incorporating a mix of uses) that underpins the general perception of the
attractiveness of town centres, and the resulting commitment to the principle of mixed-use
development’. Mixed-use development can be better promoted by ‘adopting a less prescriptive,
more fluid planning framework, which focuses on the aggregate impact of emerging
development proposals as much as the qualities of the individual schemes’.
17
4.47. The report states that ‘Mixed-use development zones ('MXD' zones) could be used to
designate areas in, and immediately around, town centres which will be subject to a policy that
encourages mixed-use development. These would complement specific individual sites
designated for mixed-use development. This approach could be implemented through nonstatutory town centre plans or strategies, site-specific development briefs, and the development
plan. It would also support the revitalisation of single-use areas, building on existing mixed-use
developments, and the preservation of existing mixed-use areas’.
4.48. It is also suggested that the potential of mixed-use would be ‘enhanced by increasing
awareness of its role as a tool for the enrichment and sustainable regeneration of town centres,
emphasising the link between the type of development and quality of outcome. Suitable
mechanisms might include training courses and continuing professional development (CPD),
creation of mixed-use development websites, and a mixed-use category in awards promoted by
Government, commercial and professional bodies’.
The main conclusion of the report was as follows;
4.49. ‘The evidence of this study leads to the powerful conclusion that mixed-use development
is a desirable development objective in town centres. The case studies and the wider empirical
and anecdotal evidence highlight the important role that it can play in creating the type and
character of town centres which appeal to our intuitive aesthetic, social, cultural and physical
precepts. Moreover the study points to the significance of housing as an essential component,
in terms of both mixed-use output and outcome’.
The key findings are summarised as follows:








Housing contributes an important qualitative benefit to a mix of uses, the residents providing
vitality through continuity and variety of presence, which is not provided by employment or
commercial uses, whose active period is limited to the working day.
Housing development in town centres tends to deliver a mixed-use configuration, because the
treatment of the street-level interface favours the introduction of commercial uses on lower
floors.
The property market demonstrates that there is a strong, continuing demand for town centre
housing, albeit that it will always represent a relatively small share of overall housing demand.
Residential developers are responding to the current market climate and are active promoters
of new mixed-use development.
The commonly-cited obstacles or barriers to the realisation of mixed-use development may be
overstated; and where these obstacles do exist, they are usually not specific to mixed-use
development, but more in the nature of routine development practice which affects both mixed
and single use developments alike.
There are two interrelated factors, which are crucial in defining the context or climate in which
mixed-use development happens: the perception and application of the concept by the local
planning authorities, and the operation of the property market.
The premise which underpins the research specification is that mixed use is a type or category
of development product, and possibly involves a distinctive development process. In our view it
incorporates both of these and yet is neither since it is in reality a development outcome, a
higher-level concept.
It is the mixed-use outcome (a richly-textured area environment comprising a mix of uses and
activities) rather than the mixed-use output (a discrete development incorporating a mix of
uses) that underpins the general perception of attractiveness of town centres, and the resulting
commitment to the principle of mixed-use development.
18








An area-based approach for the planning and promotion of mixed-use development will be the
most effective way of realising vibrant and attractive town centre environments.
Short-term opportunistic investment by property developers appears in the current property
climate to be more effective in delivering mixed-use environments than the long-term approach
of the institutional investor.
Based on the research findings and the broader experience derived from exposure to mixeduse environments during the study, the report confirms the following:
The positive contribution which mixed use makes to town centre environments;
The wide variety of development outputs which it produces, which contribute to richer, more
attractive urban form and dynamics;
The above average quality of the resulting development, which we suggest flows from the
more demanding planning and design process involved;
The more efficient use of land than offered by single-use development;
The introduction of new - or different - life back into town centres, especially through the large
private sector and affordable housing component
4.50. It finally concludes that ‘policy and practice should be directed more roundly towards the
realisation of attractive and vibrant town centre environments, and should avoid becoming
over-reliant on a particular type of development product. We echo the Urban Task Force's view
that there is a broad consensus on what constitutes good town centre environments, although
we may argue long and hard about the merits of the individual components. We need not
confuse this consensus by overlaying policies or methodologies for its realisation, when what is
sought is nothing more or less than the creation of high-quality environments’.
Approach to Mixed-Use in the Re-Deposit Draft Replacement UDP (January 2006)
[CD/DP/03]
4.51. The Mixed-Use policies contained within the Re-Deposit Draft Replacement UDP
(January 2006) follow on from the strategic policies STR13, STR14 and in particular STR15
contained within Chapter 4 of the emerging plan. These policies refer to Urban Design and the
Built Environment.
4.52. Policies STR13, STR14 relate to the provision of ‘attractive and well-designed public
spaces both in areas serving a wide catchment and at a neighbourhood scale to increase
accessibility between and within areas’ and the highlighting of ‘prestige development sites
where design considerations will be particularly important and also to address design
considerations at the neighbourhood scale’.
4.53. Of particular relevance is Policy STR15, which aims to ‘promote the role of mixed use
development in larger-scale neighbourhood redevelopment schemes, and to selectively
promote higher-density living at more highly-accessible locations, where there is good access
by public transport, walking and cycling’.
4.54. The mixed-use policies are site specific and contain objectives relating to each of the
allocated parcels of land. It is mentioned that a mix of uses ‘from among those stated, as
mixed-use’ would be ‘beneficial in achieving the most efficient use of land’ on the sites
allocated for mixed-use development except for site MU16 (South of Pelaw Way). This is due
to the fact that the only permitted uses would be Business (B1) and residential (C3) and that
the site was identified in the Urban Housing Capacity Study as ‘possibly contributing to housing
supply’. It also states that ‘100 percent business use would also be acceptable on this site’.
19
4.55. Additionally it is mentioned that due to the ‘spatial focus upon regenerating previouslydeveloped land along the river corridors’ that some of the mixed-use sites ‘are identified by the
Environment Agency’s Flood Zone Map as high and moderate risk areas’ and that ‘regard
should be given therefore to Policy ENV57’. Four mixed-use employment sites (MU12, MU19,
MU20, MU22) are within high-risk flood zone and three mixed use employment sites (MU1,
MU7, MU23) are within medium flood risk zone. In addition a Strategic Flood Risk Assessment
has commenced which the Council and the Environment Agency have considered. [CD/TOP/03
par 232]
4.56. One of the main reasons for this is ‘the spatial priority for regeneration along the River
Tyne Corridor and Central Gateshead Growth Pole in accordance with emerging RSS
(CD/REG/03) Policy 6 and Tyne and Wear Economic Strategy (CD/JE/33) (D4.3), RES
(CD/REG/04) (p103) and emerging RES (CD/REG/05) (p117)’ [CD/TOP/03 par 228]
4.57. In terms of accessibility the following mixed use sites (MU5, MU6, MU7, MU8, MU9,
MU11, MU12, MU14, MU16, MU17, MU18, and MU19) are located with links or potential links
to existing public transport interchanges in line with PPS1 (CD/GOV/01) para 27vii PPG13
(CD/GOV/13) para 30 and RSS (CD/REG/03) Policy EL7.
4.58. The following sites were de-allocated as mixed-use;



MU4 – Dunston Riverside Phase II [Site Deleted]: This site was re-allocated as a housing site
[H3.65] as it is within the Bridging NewcastleGateshead (Housing Market Renewal Pathfinder)
area and will be developed according to the implementation of a Gateshead Council
development brief for the site.
MU10 – Charles Street [Site Deleted]: This site was removed due to the fact that it now lies
within Gateshead Primary Shopping Area and therefore is considered appropriate for a range
of town centre uses.
MU15 – Land opposite Oakfield Terrace, Pelaw [Site Deleted]: This site was de-allocated as a
mixed-use site and re-allocated as a housing site.
4.59. A total of eight new mixed-use sites were allocated in the revised re-deposit plan. These
sites were added due to the fact that they were considered to be suitable for the provision of
viable mixed-use development.





MU18 – Land at Hudson Street/Half Moon Lane: Allocation is considered to have potential
given its key location in close proximity to Gateshead Town Centre. Accordingly, the site could
accommodate the range of uses as set out in Policy MU18 of the redeposit plan.
MU19 – Pipewellgate: The site was previously unallocated in the deposit plan, however the untapped potential of the site to accommodate a wide range of uses has now been identified in
Policy MU19 of the redeposit plan.
MU20 – West of Derwenthaugh Road: This site was added in response to consideration of
objections (0137/513707 and 0138/513822) to the use allocated in the deposit draft plan
[CD/DP/02] the site is now allocated for B1, B2 and open space and the Site of Nature
Conservation Importance [SNCI] boundary has also been extended across the site.
MU21 – Gateshead Stadium: Further opportunities have now been identified to provide sports
related development around Gateshead International Stadium and the Regional Performance
Centre. Policy MU21 facilitates these opportunities and includes the range of uses identified in
association with para 6.39 of the Re-deposit Replacement Plan [CD/DP/03].
MU22 – Bill Quay Riverside: Due to the consideration of the objections (0052/505201 and
0028/502800) to the lack of development at Bill Quay Riverside and the preparation of Felling
20



and Bill Quay Masterplan. The mixed-use site would include business, industry, residential,
retail and cafes/ restaurants.
MU23 – Derwent West Bank: Due to consideration of Policy JE2.7 allocation for employment
related use and objection 0104/510401. The scope of uses of the land has been broadened to
those identified in Policy MU23 of the Re-deposit Replacement Plan [CD/DP/03].
MU24 – Former Auction Mart Site, Crawcrook: Previously unallocated in the Draft Deposit plan
[CD/DP/02], (with the exception of a small rectangle of protected allotments) this site is now
considered suitable to the range of uses identified in Policy MU24. Provision of open space is
included to address priority needs within the neighbourhood.
MU25 – Grange Road, Ryton: An identified need to enhance medical services has emerged in
the Ryton area. This would involve replacement of a clinic and the retention of the site
identified for financial and professional services and residential development. Policy MU25
would facilitate such development.
4.60. Additionally the boundaries of a number of mixed-use sites were altered from those
present in the Deposit Draft Replacement Unitary Development Plan [CD/DP/02];







MU1 - Former Blaydon Comprehensive School: The boundary was changed in order to ensure
that any future development on the site would retain the existing open space and recreational
facilities.
MU3 – Fife Engineering Long Rigg: The boundary of this site was extended both to the
northwest and southeast in order to take account of locational characteristics.
MU9 – Hawks Road/South Shore Road: The boundary of this site was revised (extended to the
northwest) in order for it to be aligned with the Council's development brief for the site and
additionally for its range of uses broadened in order to maximise locational advantage in
relation to Gateshead Quays and Gateshead Town Centre. It is considered that mixed use
would be the only acceptable use on this site as the urban vitality, attractiveness and essence
of the area needs to be maintained and integrated with the existing iconic development on the
Gateshead Quayside.
MU11 – Ann Street: Revised to realise potential for adjacent sites
MU12 – Go Gateshead Bus Depot, Sunderland Road: The site is located within Area Action
Plan 5 –(Central Gateshead) and the boundary was revised to realise the potential of the
adjacent vacant industrial premises.
MU16 – South of Pelaw Way: Revised to avoid development on Wagon Way.
MU17 – South of Pelaw Metro Station: Revised to take account of the extension of Pelaw
Secondary Employment Area [SEA] following development of two industrial units at Pelaw
Way.
Sequential test
4.61. The mixed-use sites within or the edge of Gateshead Town Centre (MU5, MU6, MU7,
MU8, MU9, MU12, MU13, MU18, MU19) are close to or will have good links to Gateshead
Interchange. MU5, MU7, MU8, MU9, MU11, MU12, MU13, MU18 and MU19 are located within
the town centre whereas MU3, MU6, MU16 and MU17 are considered edge of centre sites.
21
4.62. As set out in paragraph 7.18 of the Re-Deposit UDP [CD/DP/03] Gateshead Council
intends undertaking office needs floorspace assessment and consider the capacity of the town
centre to accommodate office development in line with PPS6 (CD/GOV/06) para 2.39. As this
study has not yet been commissioned, the Council does not wish to only allocate sites for office
use in sequentially preferable locations, therefore sites MU1, MU2, MU20, MU22 & MU23 are
considered to be acceptable locations for mixed-use development. For more information refer
to Jobs, Employment & Economy Topic Paper [CD/TOP/03] [Par 221-223]
4.63. Appendix 2 Table 2 shows that of the eleven mixed use sites [which include hotels (C1)
and leisure (D2) as permitted uses] eight are in central locations (MU5, MU7, MU8, MU9,
MU11, MU12, MU13, MU19). One site is an edge of centre (MU6) and two sites are out of
centre (MU14, MU23). The town centre designations provide sites for major hotels, which cater
for business, and visiting tourists. This complies with Tourism Best Practice Guide
[CD/GOV/50] annex A paragraph 3. The Council considers that the designation of two out of
centre sites for hotel use, [MU14 and MU23] can be justified based upon: PPS6 [CD/GOV/06]
paragraphs 2.45 and 2.46 which require that designated sites are realistic and can
accommodate a range of business models. This also complies with the general locational
principle for hotel and serviced accommodation contained within annex 3 of the Tourism Best
Practice Guide [CD/GOV/50].
4.64. MU14 is a previously developed site located adjacent to an accessible residential area
and established tourist attraction, which has the potential to accommodate a modest hotel
consistent with the character of the conservation area. It is therefore considered that this
location will accommodate the needs of a particular hotel market in accordance with the Good
Practice Guide for Tourism Annex A paragraph 4 [CD/GOV/50].
4.65. With regard to MU23 given its location on traffic route alongside the A1 and A694 it is
considered that the site would be appropriate for a budget hotel, motel or travel lodge suitable
for business travellers on en-route to a destination which is generally consistent with Good
Practice Guide for Tourism Annex 3 para 14 [CD/GOV/50]. The North East Tourism Strategy
component E4 [CD/REG/08 p19] highlights that there is often a shortage of the accommodation
for business tourists and it is hoped that this designation can contribute to meeting this
demand. For more information see Jobs, Employment & Economy Topic Paper [CD/TOP/03]
Conclusion
4.66. Based on the gathered information and guidance in relation to mixed-use policy this
paper concludes the following; that the sites identified and allocated as being suitable for
mixed-use development in the emerging plan are considered to be in accordance with current
Government guidance and best practice.
22
Appendix 1: The range of uses encouraged to be permitted on Mixed-Use sites.
MU1 – Former Blaydon Comprehensive School Site;





business (B1);
residential institutions (C2);
residential (C3);
non–residential including cultural institutions (D1)
leisure (D2);
MU2 – Hannington Works Area





business (B1);
general industrial (B2);
storage or distribution (B8);
hotels (C1); and
residential (C3)
MU3 – Fife Engineering Long Rigg


business (B1)
residential (C3)
MU4 – Dunston Riverside Phase II [Site Deleted]
MU5 – Askew Road (West), Bensham





business (B1);
hotels (C1);
residential (C3);
leisure (D2) (ancillary only); and
restaurants and cafes (A3) (ancillary only);
MU6 – Askew Road (East), Bensham






business (B1);
hotels (C1);
residential institutions (C2);
residential (C3);
leisure (D2) (ancillary); and
restaurants and cafes (A3) (ancillary).
MU7 – Tyne Bridge Towers








retail (A1);
restaurants and cafes (A3);
drinking establishments (A4);
business (B1);
residential (C3);
hotels (C1);
non-residential, including cultural, institutions
(D1);
leisure (D2);
MU8 – Hillgate, Gateshead Quays Riverside








retail (A1);
restaurants and cafes (A3);
drinking establishments (A4);
business (B1);
hotels (C1);
residential (C3);
non-residential, including cultural,
institutions (D1);
leisure (D2);
MU9 – Hawks Road/South Shore Road









retail (A1);
financial and professional services (A2);
restaurants and cafes (A3) (ancillary);
drinking establishments (A4)
business (B1);
hotel (C1);
residential (C3);
non-residential institutions (D1); and
leisure (D2);
MU10 – Charles Street [Site Deleted]
MU11 - Ann Street










shops (A1);
financial and professional services (A2);
restaurants and cafes (A3);
drinking establishment (A4);
hot food takeaways (A5);
business (B1);
hotels (C1);
residential (C3);
non-residential, including cultural,
institutions (D1); and
leisure (D2)
MU12 – Go Gateshead Bus Depot, Sunderland
Road





business (B1);
residential Institutions (C2);
residential (C3)
non-residential, including cultural,
institutions (D1); and
leisure (D2);
23
MU13 – Tynegate Precinct







food and drink (A3);
business (B1);
hotels (C1);
residential institutions (C2);
residential (C3);
non-residential institutions (D1); and
leisure (D2);
MU14 – Gateshead College, Durham Road






restaurants and cafes (A3);
business (B1);
hotels (C1);
residential institutions (C2);
residential (C3); and
non-residential, including cultural, institutions
(D1);
MU15 – Land opposite Oakfield Terrace, Pelaw
[Site Deleted]
MU16 – South of Pelaw Way


business (B1)
residential (C3).
MU17 – South of Pelaw Metro Station





business (B1)
general industrial (B2)
MU21 – Gateshead Stadium





Restaurants & Cafes (A3) (ancillary)
Hotels (C1)
Residential Institutions (C2)
Non-residential institution (D1)
Leisure (D2).
MU22 – Bill Quay Riverside





Shops (A1)
Restaurants & Cafes (A3)
Business (B1)
General Industrial (B2)
Residential (C3)
MU23 – Derwent West Bank





Business (B1);
General Industrial (B2);
Storage or Distribution (B8);
Hotel (C1); and
Creche (D1).
MU24 – Former Auction Mart Site, Crawcrook
business (B1)
residential (C3)
public surface car parking
MU18 – Land at Hudson Street/Half Moon Lane








MU20 – West of Derwenthaugh Road
shops (A1);
financial and professional services (A2);
restaurants and cafes (A3);
drinking establishments (A4);
business (B1);
hotels (C1);
residential (C3); and
leisure (D2).



Housing (C3);
Non-residential institutions (D1) (health
centre);
Public open space
MU25 – Grange Road, Ryton


Professional services (A2);
Non-residential institutions (D1)
MU19 – Pipewellgate






restaurants & cafes (A3);
drinking establishments (A4);
office and research and development
(B1a/B1b);
hotels (C1);
residential (C3); and
leisure (D2).
24
Appendix 2: Mixed Use Tables
Table 1: Sequential assessment of sites based upon paragraph 2.44 and Table 2 Annex A of PPS 6 (source CD/TOP/03)
Mixed use
Uses
Max
indicative
B1
Location Type as per
allocation PPS 6 for office
Location Type as per PPS 6 for other main town centre
uses
Former Blaydon Comprehensive School,
MU1
B1, C2, C3, D1, D2
Hannington Works Area, MU2
B1, B2, B8, C1, C3
0.59 out of centre
3.15 out of centre
out of centre
out of centre
Fife Engineering, Long Rigg MU3
B1, C3
Edge of Swalwell local
2.61 centre within 300m.
Edge of Swalwell local centre within 300m.
Askew Road West MU5
B1, C1, C3, D2, A3
In Gateshead town
0.53 centre
Edge of centre in terms of retail (within 300m of Primary
Retail Area). In town centre other town centre uses.
Askew Road East MU6
B1, C1, C2, C3, D2, A3
Edge of Gateshead town
centre- within 300m of
Gateshead town centre,
eastern part of site within
500m of Gateshead
Edge of Gateshead town centre for uses (except retail0.29 Interchange.
greater than 300m from Primary Retail Area)
Tyne Bridge Tower, Cannon St MU7
A1,A3, A4, B1, C1, C3, D1,
D2
In Gateshead town
0.14 centre
In centre for town centre uses except retail. Edge of centre
for retail (within 300m of Primary Retail Area)
Hillgate, Gateshead Quays MU8
A1, A3, A4, B1, C1, C3, D1,
D2
In Gateshead town
1.2 centre
In centre for town centre uses except retail. For retail uses
not considered an edge of centre for retail ( greater than
300m from Primary Retail Area)
Hawks Rd/South Shore Rd MU9
A1,A2, A3, A4, B1, C1, C3,
D1, D2
In Gateshead town
1.96 centre
In centre for town centre uses except retail. For retail uses
not considered an edge of centre for retail ( greater than
300m from Primary Retail Area)
Ann Street, Gateshead MU11
A1, A2, A3,A4,A5,B1, C1, C3,
D1,D2
In Gateshead town
0.7 centre
In centre for town centre uses except retail. Edge of centre
for retail (within 300m of Primary Retail Area)
B1, C2, C3, D1, D2
In Gateshead town
0.42 centre
In centre for town centre uses except retail. For retail uses
not considered an edge of centre for retail ( greater than
300m from Primary Retail Area)
A3, B1, C1, C2, C3, D1, D2
A3, B1, C1, C2, C3, D1
In Gateshead town
1.73 centre
1.01 Out of centre
In centre for town centre uses except retail. For retail uses
not considered an edge of centre for retail ( greater than
300m from Primary Retail Area)
out of centre
B1, C3
Edge of centre (within
500m of Pelaw metro
0.38 station).
Edge of centre within 300m of Pelaw local centre
South of Pelaw Metro Station MU17
B1, C3, parking
Edge of centre (within
500m of Pelaw metro
1.08 station).
Edge of centre within 300m of Pelaw local centre
Hudson St/Half Moon Lane MU18
A1, A2, A3, A4, B1, C1, C3,
D2
In Gateshead town
0.18 centre
Edge of Gateshead town centre for uses (except retailgreater than 300m from Primary Retail Area)
A3,A4, B1a/B1b, C1, C3, D2
B1, B2
A1, A3, B1, B2, C3
B1, B2, B8, C1, D1
In Gateshead town
0.26 centre
4.5 out of centre
0.87 out of centre
8.17 out of centre
In centre for town centre uses except retail. For retail uses
not considered an edge of centre for retail ( greater than
300m from Primary Retail Area)
out of centre
out of centre
out of centre
Total maximum B1 allocation
in town centre
7.12
Total maximum B1 allocation
edge of centre
47.23
Go-Gateshead Bus Depot MU12
Tynegate Precinct, MU13
Gateshead College, Shipcote MU14
South of Pelaw Way MU16
Pipewellgate MU19
West of Derwenthaugh Road MU20
Bill Quay Riverside MU22
Derwent West Bank MU23
26
Table 2: Designated MU sites where hotel development is proposed to be permitted, categorised by type of location
Type of location as per PPS6 Annex A
Table 2*
Re-Deposit Draft Replacement UDP
Reference
MU2
MU5
MU6
MU7
MU8
MU9
Range of uses
B1, B2,, B8, C1, C3
B1, C1, C3, D2, A3
B1, C1, C2, C3, D2, A3
A1,A3, A4, B1, C1, C3, D1, D2
A1, A3, A4, B1, C1, C3, D1, D2
A1,A2, A3, A4, B1, C1, C3, D1, D2
Ann Street
Tynegate Precinct, Sunderland Road
Gateshead College
Hudson Street/Half Moon
Pipewellgate
Gateshead Stadium
Derwent West Bank
MU11
MU13
MU14
MU18
MU19
MU21
MU23
In Gateshead town centre Primary Retail Area
therefore hotel use apart from entrance would
A1, A2, A3, A4, A5, B1, C1, C3, D1, D2 not be permitted at ground floor level.
A3, B1, C1, C2, C3, D1, D2
In Gateshead Town Centre
A3, B1, C1, C2, C3, D1
Out of Centre
A1, A2, A3, A4, B1, C1, C3, D2
In Gateshead Town Centre
A3,A4, B1a/B1b, C1, C3, D2
In Gateshead Town Centre
A3, C1, C2, D1, D2
Out of Centre
B1, B2, B8, C1, D2
Out of Centre
East Gateshead Primary Employment Area
JE1.6
B1, B2, B8, less 200 m2 (A1, A2, A3,
In Gateshead Town Centre, Edge of Centre
A5, D1) Exceptions may be made for C1 and Out of Centre
*Town Centre - within boundary of Town
Centre
Out of Centre-a location not in or on the edge
Edge-of-Centre -within 300 metres of a centre of a centre but not necessarily outside urban
boundary
area.
Location
Hannington Works Area, Swalwell
Askew Road West
Askew Road East
Tyne Bridge Tower, Cannon St, Gateshead
Hillgate, Gateshead Quays
Hawks Raod/South Shore Rd
Out of Centre
Edge of Centre
In Gateshead Town Centre
In Gateshead Town Centre
In Gateshead Town Centre
In Gateshead Town Centre
27
Table 3: MU sites assessed against the sequential approach of DP1 of RSS and Policy 3 of emerging RSS
Priority 1. Sustainable
previously-developed sites
and buildings in urban areas,
(Policy 3 particularly around
public transport nodes)
Priority 2.Other suitable locations
within urban areas not identified
as land to be protected for nature
or heritage conservation or
recreational purposes.
Mixed use
Former Blaydon
Comprehensive School, MU1
*possible impact on
recreational use
Hannington Works Area, MU2
Fife Engineering, Long Rigg
MU3
*
* potential archeological
remains
Askew Road West MU5
*
Askew Road East MU6
Tyne Bridge Tower, Cannon
St MU7
Hillgate, Gateshead Quays
MU8
Hawks Rd/South Shore Rd
MU9
Go-Gateshead Bus Depot
MU12
*
Priority 3. Suitable sites in
locations adjoining urban
areas, particularly where
this involves the use of
previously-developed land
and buildings;
Priority 4. Suitable sites in
settlements outside urban areas,
particularly where this involves
the use of previously-developed
land and buildings.
Not Meet Sequential Test
*
*
*
*
Tynegate Precinct, MU13
*
Gateshead College, Shipcote
MU14
*conservation area
South of Pelaw Way MU16
*Greenfield
South of Pelaw Metro Station
MU17
*Greenfield
28
Hudson St/Half Moon Lane
MU18
Pipewellgate MU19
West of Derwenthaugh Road
MU20
Bill Quay Riverside MU22
Derwent West Bank MU23
*Greenfield
* recreational use, green
corridor
*
29
Appendix 3: List of Core Document References
Circular 6/98 Planning and Affordable Housing [CD/GOV/46]
Circular 05/2005 Planning Obligations [CD/GOV/47]
Delivering Affordable Housing through Planning Policy, ODPM 2002, [CD/GOV/52]
Good Practice Guide for Tourism [CD/GOV/50]
Housing Land Availability Assessments: Identifying appropriate land for housing development
Draft Practice Guide [CD/GOV/03d]
Jobs, Employment and Economy Topic Paper [CD/TOP/03]
Mixed Use Development, Practice and Potential, ODPM 2002 [CD/MU/01]
Planning Policy Guidance 3: Housing [CD/GOV/03]: Published March 2000. Two updates
published January 2005.
Planning Policy Statement 1: Delivering Sustainable Development [CD/GOV/01]: PPS1 sets
out the Government's overarching planning policies on the delivery of sustainable development
through the planning system. Published February 2005. This replaces PPG Note 1: General
Policies and Principles (published February 1997).
Consultation Paper on New Planning Policy Statement 3 (PPS3): Housing - Department for
Communities and Local Government. [CD/GOV/03a] Consultation document on new draft
PPS3, published December 2005.
Planning Policy Statement 6: Planning for Town Centres [CD/GOV/06]: PPS6 sets out the
Government's policy on planning for the future of town centres. Published March 2005. This
replaces Revised PPG Note 6: Town Centres and Retail Developments (published 1996) and
subsequent policy statements.
‘Planning Glossary 2005 A Public Guide to Land Use Planning terms and Phrases’, GONE
2005, [CD/GOV/53]
Planning for the Communities of the Future, ODPM [CD/GOV/55]
Written Ministerial Statement on Housing (Planning) 17th July 2003 [CD/GOV/03e]