Candidate Sites Assessment Methodology and Guidance Note

Introduction

Context

Neath Port Talbot Council (NPTC) adopted its Local Development Plan (LDP) in January 2016. The Plan provides a clear vision for the County Borough setting out where, when and how much new development will take place over the plan period (2011-2026).

In accordance with Section 69 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 and Regulation 41 of the Town and Country Planning (Local Development Plan) Regulations 2005 as amended in 2015, in January 2020, given that four years had passed since the adoption of the LDP, NPTC commenced a review of its LDP.  Following public consultation January-March 2020, the LDP Review Report was approved for publication in July 2020.

Following approval of the Delivery Agreement (DA) for the Replacement LDP (RLDP) by Council in December 2021, and subsequent agreement by Welsh Government (WG) in January 2022, the Council has started to prepare its RLDP.

As part of the preparation of the RLDP, the Council will re-consider all aspects of the current LDP, including all current policies and site-specific allocations. The RLDP will set out where, when and how much growth will take place over the next 15 years (2021-2036).

Candidate Sites and the RLDP Process

As set out in the DA, one of the key stages in the preparation of the RLDP, is the submission and consideration of Candidate Sites for site specific allocations, for a range of development types. The key principle of the Candidate Sites assessment process is to gather suitable evidence from site promoters to robustly demonstrate the suitability, deliverability and financial viability of sites for inclusion in the RLDP.

The 'Call for Candidate Sites' is the first formal stage in the preparatory stages of the RLDP following agreement and publication of the DA. As part of the Call, site promoters are able to submit sites to be considered for inclusion in the RLDP.

Sites will then be assessed, and a determination made as to whether each site is suitable, deliverable and financially viable.

Document Structure

This document sets out:

• Part 1: Candidate Sites Assessment Methodology
• Part 2: Candidate Site Submission Guidance

The document has been prepared to ensure compliance with legislative requirements, national planning policy and national guidance as appropriate. It will ensure that the identification of suitable sites for allocation is founded on a robust, transparent and credible assessment of land submitted.

Candidate Sites Assessment Methodology

Methodology Overview

The diagram below provides an overview of the Candidate Sites Assessment Methodology and anticipated timeframes for each step.

Table 2.8.1 DA Preparation Stages

Step	Timeframe
1. Call for Candidate Sites	March - May 2022
2. Preparation of Candidate Sites Register	March - June 2022
3. Publication of Candidate Sites Register	June 2022
4. Informal Community Feedback on Candidate Sites Register	June - August 2022
5. Stage 1 Initial Candidate Sites Assessment	July 2022
6. Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment Additional Information Request	August 2022
7. Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment	September - October 2022
8. Preferred Strategy Consultation	March - April 2023
9. Post Preferred Strategy Consultation Review of Information Submitted	May - June 2023
10. Deposit Plan Consultation	March - April 2024
11. Post Deposit Plan Consultation	May - August 2024

In accordance with national guidance (DPM (Edition 3, 2020, Paragraph 3.65)), the Council will undertake a two stage assessment process:

• Staged 1: Initial Candidate Sites Assessment
• Staged 2: Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment

To be as effective as possible, the Candidate Sites Assessment will incorporate the Integrated Sustainability Appraisal (ISA) for Candidate Sites to avoid assessment duplication. A refined set of sustainability indicators and a transparent scoring system has been included within Appendix A to allow prospective site promoters to consider the likely performance of their candidate site against the assessment criteria.

In addition to these sustainability indicators, a number of other site suitability criteria will need to be taken into consideration in site. These are provided within Appendix B.

Step 1: Call for Candidate Sites

The Call for Candidate Sites is the appropriate time to submit sites for potential inclusion in the Plan.

The Call for Candidate Sites is the first formal stage in the preparatory stages of the RLDP following the agreement and publication of the DA.

Through the Call for Candidate Sites, the Council will invite developers, landowners, site promoters, public bodies, service providers and others with an interest in land to submit sites which they wish to be considered as a potential allocation for either development or protection.

Sites can be submitted for a variety of uses including, but not limited to:

• Housing;
• Employment;
• Community facilities;
• Tourism;
• Green Infrastructure;
• Waste;
• Education;
• Social care;
• Gypsy and travellers pitch provision;
• Retail;
• Recreation;
• Renewable Energy;
• Biodiversity;
• Transport infrastructure;
• Minerals; and
• Protection

As part of the Call for Candidate Sites, each site promoter will be required to submit a Candidate Sites Submission Form which should be completed as fully and accurately as possible.

Residential and employment-led sites will also be required to submit a high-level viability appraisal using the Mid and South West Wales Development Viability Model, for which there are the following fees:

• Sites 1 to 9 residential units: £195
• Sites 10-50 residential units: £345
• Sites 51-100 residential units: £495
• Sites 100 or more residential units: £ to be agreed with Council depending on size and complexity of the proposal, but no less than £495
• Employment: £ to be agreed with the Council depending on size and complexity of the proposal

The Council will charge £50 for an initial copy of the model to enable the submission of the high-level viability appraisal at the Call for Candidate Sites stage. The remainder of the fee will be required prior to the Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment for successfully filtered sites (see Steps 6 and 7 below). Site promoters will be required to contact the Council prior to the submission of their sites to obtain a copy of the site-specific Development Viability Model by email (LDP@npt.gov.uk) or phone (01639 686 821).

The high-level viability appraisal will be required to be accompanied by a high-level viability statement providing information and evidence regarding assumptions made. Viability information submitted as part of the Call for Candidate Sites will be used to help inform the Council's High-Level Viability Assessment.

Please note that following discussions with the Council's Legal Team and the development industry, in accordance with national planning guidance (DPM, Edition 3, 2020, Paragraph 95), the Council will apply an 'open book' approach to viability information submitted to ensure transparency of evidence.

Information submitted during the Call for Candidate Sites will not be made publicly available and instead will be used to inform assumptions as part of the high level viability work. This information may however need to be made publicly available should the Council receive a request via the Environmental Information Regulations or Freedom of Information Act. Should the Council receive such a request, the Council will discuss the request with the developer.

To enable the completion of the high-level viability appraisal, in accordance with national guidance (DPM (Edition 3, 2020, Paragraph 3.50)), the Council has prepared Viability Guidance Notes which are available on the Council's website.

Please note:

• Failure to provide a viability appraisal for residential and employment-led sites will result in the site being considered unviable and therefore not progress any further in the Candidate Sites assessment process.
• The Council will only accept viability appraisals submitted using the Mid and South West Wales Development Viability Model.
• Each copy of the Development Viability Model is site-specific.
• A detailed viability report will not be provided for site promoters.
• The fees do not allow for either completion of the model by Council Officers or engagement between Council officers and site promoters with regards to assumptions/ completion of the model etc. Detailed guidance notes, user guide and videos will be provided to aid completion of the model.

Any other relevant studies, reports and information to support the Candidate Sites submission should also be provided. This should be proportionate to the nature and scale of the development proposed.

The information submitted will help to enable the Council to assess whether:

• The site is in a sustainable location and it can be freed from all fundamental constraints
• The site is capable of being delivered
• The site is viable

Information on how sites can be submitted, timeframes for submission and further guidance on how to complete the Candidate Sites Submission Form is provided within the Guidance Section of this document.

To assist in the submission of Candidate Sites, the Council has provided an interactive constraints map on its website. Cadw's Archwilio Historic Environment Records of Wales Map can also be used to check whether there are any sites of historic interest within the proposed candidate site boundary.

Candidate Site Submissions should be submitted to the Council's Planning Policy Team using the Candidate Sites Submission Form:

• Online: via the Council's Consultation portal
• By email: LDP@npt.gov.uk
• By post to: Mr Ceri Morris, Head of Planning and Public Protection, Neath Port Talbot Council, The Quays, Brunel Way, Baglan Energy Park, Neath. SA11 2GG

Step 2: Preparation of Candidate Sites Register

Following the submission of sites and closure of the Call for Candidate Sites, the Council will prepare a Candidate Sites Register. The Candidate Sites Register will record all sites submitted with the following information:

• Spatial area
• Ward
• Candidate site number (for example, RLDP/AMV/0001)
• Candidate site name
• Site area (ha)
• Current use (existing use, greenfield/ brownfield)
• Proposed use
• Site promoter
• OS map detailing site boundary

Step 3: Candidate Sites Register

The Council will then publish the Candidate Sites Register on the Council's website and make available at the Deposit Venues (Neath Civic Centre, Neath, SA11 3QZ; Port Talbot Civic Centre, Port Talbot, SA13 1PJ; and The Quays, Brunel Way, Baglan Energy Park, Neath, SA11 2GG)

Step 4: Informal Community Feedback on Candidate Sites Register

Following publication of the Candidate Sites Register, the Council will undertake a 9 week period of informal consultation on the Candidate Sites Register. During this period, the general public, Council Members and stakeholders will be able to provide comments about the sites on the Candidate Sites Register. The Council will also hold informal drop-in sessions for ward Members to discuss sites within their wards. Comments received will be treated informally and will not be responded to (during the Preferred Strategy Consultation, the Council will invite formal comments on the Candidate Sites).

Comments received will be used to inform the Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment and discussions with statutory consultees / key stakeholders.

Step 5: Stage 1 Initial Candidate Sites Assessment

The Stage 1 Initial Candidate Sites Assessment will include the following three stage desk-based assessment of all submitted sites:

• Site Size Filter
• Fundamental Constraints Filter
• Deliverability Filter

Residential sites may initially be filtered according to whether they meet the site size threshold of 10 units. This is in line with the threshold in the current LDP; previously agreed thresholds as part of the JHLAS work; and is reflective of planning permissions granted since the beginning of the Plan period.

Sites below this threshold may not be allocated for development; they will however still be included on the Candidate Sites Register and will be used to inform the windfall analysis, urban capacity assessment and settlement boundary review.

Sites submitted for other uses will not be filtered according to their size. Instead, the Council will use its discretion as to whether allocation is appropriate. The approach taken will be clearly detailed in the Candidate Sites Register.

Fundamental Constraints Filter

GIS software will then be used to filter sites according to whether they have any of the following fundamental constraints:

Site overlaps with or is within:

• Ramsar; and/or
• Special Area of Conservation (SAC); and/or
• Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI); and/or
• National Nature Reserve (NNR); and/or
• Class 1 Agricultural Land Classification (ALC); and/or
• Scheduled Monument (SM); and/or
• Historic Park and Gardens; and/or
• Development proposed by the private sector on common land (In the absence of further deliverability information, the proposal is likely to not be Sites promoted by NPTC on common land will not be excluded on this basis, as their public ownership provides a delivery mechanism.)  and/or
• The site proposes highly vulnerable development (TAN15 (December 2021)) within Flood Zone 3 (For the purposes of Candidate Site submissions, the Council will use TAN15 (December 2021) and Flood Map for Planning in accordance with the approach detailed in the Letter from Welsh Government dated 15 December)

If the constraint forms part of the site boundary, further consideration will be given as to whether the impact of the development could be mitigated.

Deliverability Filter

 Sites will then be filtered according to their deliverability.

Consideration will be given to whether:

• The site is being promoted for development in its entirety
• The site being promoted for development is in more than one landownership, and whether all of the landowners are promoting the site for the type and scale of development envisaged;
• The site is being promoted by the current landowner(s)/ on their behalf. Or whether the site promoter/their client has an option agreement or equivalent to purchase the site from the landowner(s);
• There are any constraints to development such as ransom strips or covenants that are not in the process of being resolved/ removed;
• The site will be brought forward for development within the Plan period; Viability information has been provided to accompany the Candidate Site submission (residential and employment-led sites only) and
• If the site is in public ownership, it has been identified in a published disposal strategy and/or through Council resolution if the land is to be retained/ sold by the Council.

National guidance (DPM (Edition 3, 2020, Table 18) is clear that existing LDP allocations should not automatically be 'rolled forward' into RLDPs. In line with national guidance, there will need to be a substantial change in circumstances to demonstrate that sites can be delivered and justified before being included in the RLDP. Existing allocation sites will need to be re-submitted and re-appraised as part of this Candidate Sites assessment process; demonstrate that they are sustainable and compatible with the preferred strategy (when formulated); and provide clear evidence that they are deliverable, including information with regards to what has changed since the previous allocation/ how previous constraints to delivery have been overcome. If the site has been previously allocated in the existing NPT LDP, as part of this deliverability filter, consideration will be given to whether:

• The site promoter has provided a clear explanation of why the site has not been brought forward for development to date and justification of how and when this will be overcome going forward (including detailed viability information where required); and
• Evidence has been provided to demonstrate that there is a clear commitment to bring the site forward within the Plan period, including where relevant, identified/ committed funding streams.

A summary of the findings will be reported in the Candidate Sites Register published as part of the Preferred Strategy consultation.

Step 6: Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment Additional Information Request

Viability Appraisal

Prior to the Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment, the Council will contact site promoters of filtered employment and residential-led sites and ask them to pay the remaining viability appraisal fee and submit a detailed viability assessment (viability appraisal plus statement providing evidence to justify assumptions).

The detailed viability assessment will need to include the high-level assumptions that the Council will provide following receipt of the remaining fee. Failure to either provide a detailed viability assessment or take into consideration the assumptions will result in the site being considered unviable and undeliverable and will result in the site being filtered out of the Stage 2 Assessment.

Please note that the fee does not include any allowances for discussion between the Council Officers and site promoters. Whilst a high-level review of the appropriateness of the information submitted will be undertaken by the Council, this will only be made available as part of the viability evidence at the Preferred Strategy consultation. Neither this nor a detailed viability report will be provided to the site promoter.

As stated in Paragraph 2.2.8 above, please note that following discussions with the Council's Legal Team and the development industry, in accordance with national planning guidance (DPM, Edition 3, 2020, Paragraph 95), the Council will apply an 'open book' approach to ensure transparency of evidence.

Information submitted during this detailed request will be made publicly available on the Council's website as part of our viability evidence base. This will include the detailed viability appraisals submitted using the DVM given that these should use the high level viability assumptions provided or other site-specific assumptions.

Please note that any information the Council receives may need to be made publicly available should the Council receive a request via the Environmental Information Regulations or Freedom of Information Act. Should the Council receive such a request, the Council will discuss the request with the developer.

ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment

Depending on the level of information provided during the Call for Candidate Sites, the Council may contact site promoters and ask them to submit more information to enable the completion of the ISA and Candidate Sites Suitability Assessment. This will be considered on a site-by-site basis.

Please note that failure to provide sufficiently detailed information will result in the site not being considered any further in the assessment process.

Step 7: Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment

A Stage 2 Candidate Sites Assessment will be undertaken of all filtered sites. The Stage 2 Candidate Sites Assessment will involve:

• Viability appraisal;
• ISA assessment (qualitative and quantitative) and Candidate Site Suitability assessment; and
• Engagement with infrastructure providers.

Viability Appraisal

The Council will review the information submitted and initially complete a high-level review of the appropriateness of the information submitted, using the agreed regional Candidate Site Financial Viability Appraisal High-Level Review. The Council will then appraise sites according to the following framework:

Table 2.8.2 Viability Appraisal Filter

Question	Yes/no
Has a detailed viability appraisal been submitted using the Mid and South West Wales Development Viability Model?	Yes/no
Does the viability appraisal submitted show the type and scale of development proposed to be financially viable?	Yes/no
Does the viability appraisal submitted use the assumptions the Council has provided (for example with regards to affordable housing/ infrastructure/ other policy costs)?   If not, is evidence provided to justify why different assumptions have been used? and does the Council consider that the viability appraisal, including assumptions, submitted is appropriate?	Yes/no
If the site is financially viable, has the site promoter confirmed that there is sufficient uplift for the landowner to release their site for development?	Yes/no
If the site is financially viable, has the site promoter confirmed that there is sufficient value/ return on the development to provide an adequate profit margin for the developer?   If there is no developer interest in the site to date, it will automatically be assumed that there is.	Yes/no
If the site is not financially viable, does the site promoter/ landowner have access to any funding mechanisms that would make the site financially viable (for example, Registered Social Landlords and Social Housing Grant)?	Yes/no
Is the Council satisfied that the site is viable?	Yes/no

ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment

The Council will then undertake detailed ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment of all filtered sites. 

See Appendices A and B for more information, including detailed site assessment criteria.

Engagement with Infrastructure Providers

The Council will engage with the infrastructure providers provided within Appendix C to identify infrastructure constraints.

Following engagement with infrastructure providers, the Council may request further information from site promoters. This will be site-specific and may include discussions regarding mitigation methods and further viability work.

Following the ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment and engagement with infrastructure providers, the Council will complete the following table for each site.

Table 2.8.1 ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment and Infrastructure Providers Engagement Filters

Question	Yes/no
Has a detailed ISA been undertaken?	Yes/no
Has the site been appraised against the Candidate Site Suitability Assessment criteria and is it considered to be suitable for development?	Yes/no
Does the site contribute towards achieving the overall objectives of the Plan?   i.e. Does the site have a positive impact in the context of its environment in relation to the objectives of the ISA?	Yes/no
Have any infrastructure constraints been identified?	Yes/no
If infrastructure constraints have been identified, have mitigation measures been proposed which are acceptable, achievable and do not impact on the overall viability of the site and has this been confirmed by the site promoter?	Yes/no
Is the Council satisfied that the site is not contrary to the ISA and objectives of the Plan and that any infrastructure constraints can be viably mitigated?	Yes/no

A summary of the findings will be reported in the Candidate Sites Register published as part of the Preferred Strategy consultation.

Step 8: Preferred Strategy Consultation

As part of the Preferred Strategy consultation, the public and stakeholders will have the opportunity to:

• Comment on any policies and sites proposed at this stage;
• Indicate which of the Tests of Soundness they consider the plan fails;
• Submit representations requesting an amendment of any proposed allocation boundaries;
• Propose the deletion or addition of sites; and
• Comment on the updated Candidate Sites Register and Initial ISA and Candidate Site Assessment Suitability Report.

Sites promoted through the Preferred Strategy consultation will be required to undertake a Stage 1 Initial Candidate Sites Assessment and Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment and align with the Preferred Strategy (see Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan Submitted Sites chapter for more information).

Step 9: Post Preferred Strategy Consultation

Following the Preferred Strategy consultation, the Council will:

• Consider representations received (including those promoting new sites and those commenting on the Tests of Soundness);
• Review Stage 1 and Stage 2 assessments of newly submitted sites and sites for which additional information has been received;
• Update and re-publish the Candidate Sites Register to detail additional sites submitted and additional information submitted;
• Undertake further ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment where required
• Identify sites to be allocated in the Deposit Plan;
• Prepare final site allocations; and
• Prepare the Initial Consultation Report which will include a schedule of individual site related comments and suggestions for new site allocations.

Step 10: Deposit Plan Consultation

The Deposit Plan consultation provides an opportunity for the public and stakeholders to:

• Comment on the policies and sites proposed in the Deposit Plan;
• Indicate which of the Tests of Soundness they consider the Plan fails;
• Comment on the updated Candidate Sites Register, Initial ISA and Candidate Site Assessment Suitability Report (including Stage 1 and Stage 2 Candidate Sites Assessment), Initial Consultation Report and any other relevant background information;
• Submit representations requesting amendments to proposed allocation boundaries and settlement limits; and
• Propose the deletion or addition of new sites

Sites promoted through the Deposit Plan consultation will be required to undertake a Stage 1 Initial Candidate Sites Assessment and Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment and align with the Preferred Strategy (see Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan Submitted Sites chapter for more information).

Step 11: Post Deposit Plan Consultation

Following the Deposit Plan consultation, the Council will:

• Consider all duly made representations, including any new sites proposed and conclude whether any amendments to the Plan are necessary; and
• Undertake an appropriate level of assessment to enable an accurate and effective response to any potential questions from the appointed Inspector at examination.

A copy of all duly made representations, the findings of any assessment undertaken and the Council's formal view on sites submitted will be recorded within the Consultation Report.

Guidance Notes​

Introduction

This part of the document provides the following guidance for the submission of Candidate Sites. Information is provided with regards to:

• Key dates and important considerations before submission;
• Information required for submission;
• Guidance on how to complete the Candidate Sites Submission Form; and
• Information required for sites submitted as part of either the Preferred Strategy or Deposit Plan consultations.

Key Dates and Important Considerations before Submission

The table below details key dates for Candidate Sites. More information is available in the DA.

Table 4.1.1 Key Dates for the Submission of Candidate Sites

Stage	Key dates
Candidate Sites Assessment Methodology Targeted Stakeholder Consultation	November 2021
Call for Candidate Sites	March - May 2022
Preparation of CSR	March - June 2022
Publication of CSR	June 2022
Informal CSR Community Feedback	June - August 2022
Stage 1 Candidate Sites Assessment	July 2022
Stage 2 Candidate Sites Assessment Additional Information Request	August 2022
Stage 2 Candidate Sites Assessment	September - October 2022
Prepare Preferred Strategy, HRA Screening and ISA	June - December 2022
Preferred Strategy Consultation	March - April 2023
Assessment, consideration and reporting of responses received on the Preferred Strategy, Interim ISA and HRA Screening Report	May - July 2023
Publication of Preferred Strategy, Interim ISA and HRA Screening Report and Initial Consultation Report	August 2023
Prepare draft Deposit Plan, ISA and HRA Reports	August 2023 - January 2024
Deposit Plan Consultation	March - April 2024
Assessment and consideration of the representations received in respect of the draft Deposit LDP, ISA and HRA Reports	May - August 2024
Prepare and report on the Consultation Report	August - October 2024
Reporting of representations to the Deposit LDP, ISA and HRA Reports. Approval to submit to WG.	September - October 2024
Submission to WG	October 2024

When can sites be submitted?

The Call for Candidate Sites is the appropriate time for the submission of Candidate Sites. Sites submitted will help to inform the preparation of the Preferred Strategy and ensure successful 'frontloading' of the RLDP preparation.

In line with national guidance, sites can be submitted as part of the Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan consultations. Such sites will however need to align with the Preferred Strategy/ Deposit Plan strategy and will need to submit further details. Sites brought forward after the Preferred Strategy are unlikely to be considered for inclusion in the Plan.

When uses can sites be submitted for?

Sites can be submitted for a variety of uses including, but not limited to:

• Housing;
• Employment;
• Community facilities;
• Tourism;
• Green Infrastructure;
• Waste;
• Education;
• Social care;
• Gypsy and travellers pitch provision;
• Retail;
• Recreation;
• Renewable Energy;
• Biodiversity;
• Transport infrastructure;
• Minerals; and
• Protection

How can sites be submitted?

During the Call for Candidate Sites, the Council encourages sites to be submitted using our online Council's Consultation portal

The Council will also accept submissions by:

• By email: LDP@npt.gov.uk
• By post to: Mr Ceri Morris, Head of Planning and Public Protection, Neath Port Talbot Council, The Quays, Brunel Way, Baglan Energy Park, Neath. SA11 2GG

Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan Consultations

Sites submitted as part of either the Preferred Strategy (also known as Pre-Deposit Plan consultation) or Deposit Plan consultations, will be required to submit sites as representations to the Plan. Representations can be submitted via the Consultation Portal, email or post. Information will be provided as part of the Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan consultations.

Important Considerations Before Submission

Please note:

• In order to demonstrate compliance with the tests of soundness, it is essential that the land allocated for development in the RLDP meets the objectives and requirements of the Plan and is suitable for and capable of being developed.
• There is no guarantee that a Candidate Site proposal will be accepted and form part of the Plan.
• The inclusion of a Candidate Site within the Candidate Sites Register does not imply that a site is suitable for development.
• Sites not identified for development in the Preferred Strategy may be introduced later in the Plan preparation process.
• The responsibility of undertaking relevant technical work to support a site's inclusion in the Plan, including all financial costs, resides solely with the site promoter.
• The Candidate Sites assessment process will take place over a number of years, it is therefore important that you inform us of any changes to the landowner and site promoters contact details. Failure to do so may result in the site being filtered out of the Candidate Sites Assessment.
• In accordance with national guidance (DPM, (Edition 3, 2020, Paragraph 5.1 and Tables 18 and 22)), existing site allocations in the NPT LDP which have not progressed as anticipated (i.e. are partly developed/ have not been brought forward for development) will not automatically be 'rolled forward' into the RLDP. Sites will only be 'rolled forward' where there is clear evidence to demonstrate that there has been a substantial change in circumstances. As part of the initial Call for Candidate Sites, where the Council has up-to-date contact information, we will contact the site promoters of such sites and encourage them to resubmit their sites as part of the Call for Candidate Sites. Detailed information regarding delivery will need to be provided (see Deliverability Guidance section).

In order to avoid the submission of sites which are fundamentally inappropriate, we would suggest reading the detailed Candidate Sites Assessment Methodology in order to understand the filtering process.

Candidate Sites Publicity

The Council will publicise the Candidate Sites process in accordance with the DA.

Prior to the Call for Candidate Sites, in February 2022 the Council will invite developers, agents, landowners, other site promoters and interested community members to a workshop to inform them of the process for submitting sites.

The Council will also invite developers, agents, landowners, other site promoters and interest community members to a workshop at the beginning of the Call for Candidate Sites to provide guidance on how to complete Candidate Site submissions.

If you wish to attend either workshop, please email your name, email address and telephone number to ldp@npt.gov.uk or phone 01639 686821.

Information Required for Submission

Each Candidate Site is required to submit a Candidate Sites Submission Form which should be completed as fully and accurately as is possible.

Residential and employment-led sites will also need to submit a viability assessment using the Mid and South West Wales Development Viability Model and a viability statement providing detail and evidence with regards to assumptions included within the appraisal. (see 'Candidate Sites Assessment Methodology' chapter and 'Completing the Candidate Site Form' chapter for more information).

Sites promoted through the Preferred Strategy/ Deposit Plan consultations will also need to submit a Stage 1 and Stage 2 Candidate Sites Assessment (see 'Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan Submitted Sites' Chapter for more information).

Any other relevant studies, reports and information to support the Candidate Sites submission should also be provided. This should be proportionate to the nature and scale of the development proposed.

Completing the Candidate Site Form

The following guidance has been produced to help site promoters to complete the Candidate Sites Submission Form as comprehensively as possible. The guidance follows the format of the Candidate Sites Submission Form. Not all questions relate to all proposals, where not applicable, please leave blank.

Site promoters should use the Council's interactive constraints map available on the Council's website to assist in the completion of the Candidate Site Form. Cadw's Archwilio Historic Environment Records of Wales Map can also be used to check whether there are any historic/ heritage sites within the proposed candidate site.

Section A: Contact Details

This section requires the following information to be provided:

• Name;
• Address;
• Email; and
• Telephone number

Agents contact details should be provided in this section if an agent is promoting the site on behalf of a landowner or developer.

The General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) requires that data protection principles, rights and obligations are applied to any personal data processing (data that the Council collects, holds and analyses) as part of the RLDP preparation process. Contact details provided will be used for all future correspondence to keep site promoters informed of the RLDP process and to request any additional information with regards to Candidate Sites. Please indicate whether you are happy for us to hold your contact details for these purposes.

Section B: Site Location

This section requires the following information to be submitted:

• Site address including postcode;
• Grid reference;
• Ordnance Survey (OS) base map; and
• Site area

Grid references can be accessed using the Grid Reference website.

An up-to-date OS base map should be provided with the site submission. The plan should:

• Contain sufficient information to ensure that the site can be easily identified;
• Have the land being promoted edged red and other land in control of the site owner/ site promoter edged blue; and
• Be drawn to a recognised scale (such as 1:2,500 or 1:1,250)

Please note that a site will not be processed without an appropriate location plan. Plans can be purchased from the Planning Portal website.

Site area should be measured in hectares (ha).

A site name (such as Site A/ Site 1) should be provided if you are submitting multiple submissions for the same site as this will help to avoid any confusion.

Section C: Existing Use

This section of the Candidate Sites Submission Form requires information to be provided with regards to the existing use of the site and the extent of the site greenfield/brownfield.

Existing Site Use 

Information should be provided regarding either:

• What the site is currently used for, for example, car showroom or agricultural field; or
• What the site was most recently used for, for example, a school.

If there is more than one use, please specify all uses and the extent of each use in net and gross. If appropriate, please provide a map delineating the extent of each use.

Greenfield/ Brownfield

Information should be provided regarding the extent of greenfield/ brownfield land (gross and net in hectares).

In order to identify the proportion of greenfield/ brownfield land, consideration should be given to the following definition of previously developed land in PPW (Edition 11, 2021, pp.37):

"Previously developed (also known as brownfield) land is that which is or was occupied by a permanent structure (excluding agricultural or forestry buildings) and associated fixed surface infrastructure. The curtilage (see note 1 below) of the development is included, as are defence buildings and land used for mineral extraction and waste disposal (see note 2 below) where provision for restoration has not been made through development management procedures.

Excluded from the definition are:

• Land and buildings currently in use for agricultural or forestry purposes;
• Land which has not been developed previously, for example parks, recreation grounds, golf courses and allotments, even though these areas may contain certain urban features such as paths, pavilions and other buildings;
• Land where the remains of any structure or activity have blended into the landscape over time so that they can reasonably be considered part of the natural surroundings;
• Land which is species rich and biodiverse and may qualify as Section 7 habitat' or be identified as having nature conservation value in the Environment Act; and Previously developed land subsequently put to an amenity use.

Notes: 

1. The curtilage is defined as the area of land attached to a building. All of the land within the curtilage of the site will also be defined as previously developed. However his does not mean that the whole area of the curtilage should therefore be redeveloped. For example, where the footprint of a building only occupies a proportion of a site of which the remainder is open land (such as a hospital) the whole site should not normally be developed to the boundary of the curtilage. The planning authority should make a judgement about site layout in this context, bearing in mind other planning considerations such as policies for the protection of open space, playing fields or development in the countryside. They should consider such factors as how the site relates to the surrounding area and requirements for on-site open space, buffer strips and landscaped areas.
2. This relates to minerals and waste sites which would otherwise remain unrestored after use because the planning permission allowing them did not include a restoration condition. All other such sites will be restored to greenfield status, by virtue of the planning condition. It should be recognised, however, that non-hazardous landfills may not be able to accommodate built development without significant investment and long-term monitoring.
3. Nature conservation value may be identified through Green Infrastructure assessments".

If the site includes both greenfield and brownfield land, please provide an indication of the area of each (gross and net, ha) and a map delineating greenfield and brownfield land.

Section D: Proposed Use

 This section of the Candidate Sites Submission Form requires information to be provided with regards to:

• The type of use you wish the site to be considered for development (for example, residential or employment); and
• The scale of development (for example, 25 homes or 2,500sqm office block)

Where mixed uses are proposed (for example, 200 homes, 1 shop and open space), a detailed mix should be provided including the number and/ or size of each use. A map should be provided to detail mixed uses where appropriate.

Residential

 For residential sites, site capacity should be informed by:

• Future Wale Strategic Placemaking Principle (pp.66) for new developments in urban areas to aim to have a density of at least 50 dwellings per hectare (net), with higher densities in more central and accessible locations.
• The existing NPT LDP density requirements:

Strategy Area	Locality	Density Requirement (Dwelling per Hectare)
Coastal Corridor Strategy Area	Neath and Port Talbot Spatial Areas	35
Valleys Strategy Area	Afan, Amman, Dulais, Neath, Swansea Valleys and Pontardawe Spatial Areas	30

Affordable Housing Led Schemes

Affordable housing led schemes will need to indicate the proportion of affordable housing proposed to be provided.

Please note, that in accordance with national planning policy (PPW(Edition 11, 2021, Paragraph 4.2.32)), affordable housing led schemes should include at least 50% affordable housing.

Custom and Self Build

If you are proposing either a custom or self-build scheme, please indicate this within this section.

Self build schemes are schemes where someone builds their own home. The level of input can vary with a person either carrying out much of the work themselves or employing a builder/ contractor to build it for them. Guidance regarding self build schemes, including purchasing land and property, project planning and financing is available on the Planning Portal website.

Custom build schemes are self build schemes where a developer is involved in some way. It could be that an individual commissions a builder to build a one off house for them, or a group of homes are built by a developer where the individual is able to design the home to their own specifications. Guidance regarding custom build housing is available on the Home Building website.

Student Accommodation

 If you are proposing student accommodation, please indicate this within this section.

Please provide as much information about the nature of the proposal and the scale of development, including for example:

• Whether it is intended that accommodation is provided as Houses of Multiple Occupation (HMOs) or purpose built student accommodation;
• Number of bed spaces proposed; and 
• The nature of any facilities proposed.

Specialist Accommodation

Please indicate in this section if you are promoting a site for specialist accommodation (housing for older people, those with support needs, other specialist accommodation). Please provide information regarding the type of specialist accommodation and the scale of the specialist accommodation.

Community

Please indicate in this section if you are proposing a site for community uses.

Please note that in view of the current financial constraints on the Council it is unlikely that ownership or management of any such proposals suggested by private individuals/ residential site promoters would be adopted by the Council. Information should therefore be provided regarding:

• What is being promoted;
• Why it is being promoted;
• How it will be funded; and
• How it will operate once open

If it is anticipated that a local community council or group will run the facility, please provide evidence of such discussions and evidence to demonstrate agreement.

Healthcare/ Education

Due to the nature of funding and planning for healthcare and education facilities, healthcare/ education facilities should only be promoted for development:

• By a healthcare/ education provider; or
• By a site promoter where they have evidence to demonstrate that there is an interested healthcare or education provider (evidence to demonstrate this should be provided).

Commercial/ Retail/ Employment

Commercial, retail and/or employment submissions should provide an estimate of the amount of floorspace proposed in square metres (sqm).

Tourism

 Submissions for tourism development should provide as much information regarding the proposed development, including for example:

• The nature of the proposal (e.g. holiday cottages, adventure park, theme park etc.)
• The scale of each component (e.g. 20 holiday chalets, 500sqm restaurant accommodation etc.)

Renewable Energy

 Renewable energy proposals should provide as much information as possible regarding the type and nature of the proposal. An estimation of the Megawatt generating capacity (MW) should also be provided.

Consideration should be given to Future Wales Policy 17 'Renewable and Low Carbon Energy and Associated Infrastructure' and Policy 18 'Renewable and Low Carbon Energy Developments of National Significance'. The Pre-Assessed Areas for Wind Energy are detailed on the Council's interactive constraints map.

Waste Sites - treatment and/or disposal

Waste site proposals should provide information regarding the volume and capacity of the site in cubic metres. Information should also be provided with regards to the type of waste, for example whether or not it is hazardous.

Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation

Proposals for Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation should provide information regarding:

• The number of pitches and/or plots proposed; and
• The nature of any communal facilities/ other uses proposed

Planning Aid Wales Gypsies and Travellers, including Travelling Showpeople Guidance provides further guidance for the submission of Gypsy and Traveller Accommodation.

Infrastructure

Information should be provided regarding the nature of the proposed infrastructure provision.

For residential and employment-led schemes, information should be provided as to whether the provision of the infrastructure has been included within the Viability Statement and if so whether it demonstrates that the development can viably provide the level of infrastructure proposed.

Biodiversity/ Green Infrastructure/ Protection

Sites being promoted for biodiversity, green infrastructure and/or protection are only required to provide information regarding the type of use you wish the site to be considered for and future management and maintenance.

Sites promoted for biodiversity, green infrastructure or protection may include sites being promoted for:

• Nature Stepping Stones or Corridors
  • Local landscape features that are of importance for biodiversity, such as trees, woodland, hedgerows and other field boundaries, watercourses, wetlands and ponds and green lanes
• Amenity greenspace
  • Informal recreation spaces, communal green spaces in and around housing and village greens
• Natural and semi-natural open space
  • Woodland, scrub, grassland, wetlands, open and running water
• Green Wedges
  • Green Wedges are local designations which essentially have the same purpose as Green Belts but are reviewed as part of the preparation of replacement LDPs. They may be used to provide a buffer between the settlement and statutory designations and safeguard important views into and out of the area. Within a Green Wedge there is a general presumption against development which is inappropriate in relation to the purposes of the designation. (PPW, Paragraphs 3.64-3.78).

If you are not the landowner of such sites, information should be provided regarding landownership. Including where possible, information regarding landowner's intentions to bring forward the site for such uses.

In submitting a site, there should be clear and evidenced reasons for doing so, it should not be seen simply as an opportunity to prevent a parcel of land from being developed. You will need to evidence and explain why, if you want a site excluded from development, what it is that warrants protection, and there may be a number of reasons you have for this opinion. This should be appropriately evidenced.

When proposing sites for Green Wedges, consideration should be given to national planning policy (PPW (Edition 11, 2021, Paragraph 3.64)) which says that proposals for Green Wedges should only be employed where there is a demonstrable need to protect the urban form and alternative policy mechanisms, such as settlement boundaries, would not be sufficiently robust.

Section E: Planning History

This section of the Candidate Sites Submission Form requires information to be provided with regards to the planning history of the site.

The following information should be provided:

• Current planning status:
• Is the site allocated in the existing LDP/ does the site form part of an existing site allocation;
• Does the site benefit from an extant planning permission?
• Does the site have a lapsed planning permission;

Overview of relevant planning history; and

Whether pre-application discussions have taken place to date?

Please provide as much detail as possible where relevant/ appropriate, including for example relevant planning application reference and/or site allocation reference.

Where relevant/ appropriate, please indicate whether any relevant site surveys have been undertaken and provide a copy of relevant surveys/reports.

Planning history can be obtained using the Planning Application Search Facility on the Council's website.

Section F: Fundamental Constraints

This section of the Candidate Sites Submission Form requires information to be submitted with regards to fundamental constraints.

• Ramsar; and/or
• Special Area of Conservation (SAC); and/or
• Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI); and/or
• National Nature Reserve (NNR); and/or
• Class 1 Agricultural Land Classification (ALC); and/or
• Scheduled Monument (SM); and/or
• Historic Park and Gardens; and/or
• Development proposed by the private sector on common land (In the absence of further deliverability information, the proposal is likely to not be viable. Sites promoted by NPTC on common land will not be excluded on this basis, as their public ownership provides a delivery mechanism.)  and/or
• The site proposes highly vulnerable development (TAN15 (December 2021)) within Flood Zone 3 (For the purposes of Candidate Site submissions, the Council will use TAN15 (December 2021) and Flood Map for Planning in accordance with the approach detailed in the Letter from Welsh Government dated 15 December)

Highly vulnerable development defined in the now postponed updated TAN15 as "development where the ability of occupants to decide on whether they wish to accept the risks to life and property associated with flooding, or be able to manage the consequences of such a risk, is limited. It also includes those industrial uses where there would be an attendant risk to the public and the water environment should the site be inundated".

 Types of development include:

• All residential premises (including hotels, Gypsy and Traveller sites and caravan parks and camping sites);
• Schools and childcare establishments, colleges and universities; Hospitals and GP surgeries;
• Especially vulnerable industrial development (e.g. power generating and distribution elements of power stations, transformers, chemical plants, incinerators), and waste disposal sites;
• Emergency services, including: ambulance stations, fire stations, police stations, command centres, emergency depots; and
• Buildings used to provide emergency shelter in time of flood.

Section G: Deliverability

This section of the Candidate Sites Submission Form requires information to be provided with regards to deliverability.

The following information should be provided in order to demonstrate site deliverability for all residential and employment sites. For all other uses, please use the questions below/ in the Candidate Sites Submission Form to guide a response to the indicative deliverability of the site. Please note that national policy and guidance stress the importance of demonstrating deliverability and 'will the plan deliver' is the third Test of Soundness.

• Landownership contact details: Name, postal address, email address and telephone number of all landowners
• Whether the site is in single or multiple landownership?
  • If the site is in more than one landownership, please provide a map delineating landownership
• Whether all of the landowners are willing to sell their land for the type and scale of development envisaged?
• Whether the site promoter is the current landowner/s or acting on behalf of the current landowner/s (i.e. agent)?
• Or if the site promoter is not the current landowner/s or acting on their behalf, whether the site promoter has an option agreement or equivalent to purchase the site from the landowner/s?
• Whether there are any issues which need to be overcome in order to deliver the site?
  • For example, ransom strips, restrictive covenants, known infrastructure and/or utility constraints. Please provide as much detail as possible.
• How the site is intended to be delivered?
  • Please provide as much information as possible, for example:
  • By the landowners as a self-build project
  • By the landowners (a developer)
  • Sold to a developer who has an option agreement to buy the site following allocation
  • Sold to a developer (currently unknown) following allocation
  • Sold to a developer (currently unknown) following obtaining planning permission etc.
• Whether there has been any developer interest in the site to date?
  • If there has been developer interest in the site, please provide as much information as possible. For example:
  • Is the site owned by a developer?
  • Does a developer have an option agreement on the site?
  • Has a developer expressed an interest in purchasing the site (and if so how long ago was this)?
  • Has the site been marketed for development?
  • Has there been any interest in the marketing of the site for development? etc.
• Whether the site is in public ownership?
• If the site is in public ownership:
  • Whether the site has been identified in a published disposal strategy; and/or
  • Whether there is a Council resolution if the land is to be retained/ sold by the public body
• Broad time frames for delivery:
  • Please provide as much information as possible, including for example: Whether the site is intended to be brought forward for development within the Plan period (2021-2036)
  • Broad time frames for the sale of land, Pre-Application Consultation (PAC), obtain planning permission, lead in times and build out rates
  • Whether it is intended that the site is brought forward in single or multiple phases
• Viability: See section below
  • If the site was allocated in the existing LDP and has not been brought forward as intended and/or has a lapsed planning permission, please provide the following:
    • A clear explanation of why the site has not been brought forward for development to date;
    • Information on what has changed in order for the site to come forward for development within this plan period (i.e. ransom strip purchased, viability constraints overcome etc.); and
    • Evidence to show that there is a clear commitment to bring the site forward at a point in time within the Plan period, including where relevant, identified/ committed funding streams
• If the site has an extant planning permission please provide as much information as possible with regards to the anticipated delivery of the site, including:
  • Extant planning permission reference; and
  • Why the site has not been brought forward to date; and
  • Whether you intend to bring forward the site for the development granted in the extant planning permission; and
  • Information on what has changed in order for you to now bring forward the site for development; and
  • If you do not intend to bring forward the site, whether you intend to bring forward the site for other uses? If so, please provide anticipated time frame and as much information as possible for us to understand when it is intended that the site will be brought forward for development

With regards to existing site allocations, national guidance (DPM (Edition 3, 2020, Paragraph 5.1, Table 18 and Table 22)) is clear that existing site allocations which have not progressed as anticipated should not automatically be 'rolled forward' into the RLDP. In accordance with the guidance provided in the manual, sites will only be 'rolled forward' where there is clear evidence to demonstrate that there has been a substantial change in circumstances. As much information should be provided as possible in order to demonstrate the deliverability of such sites. This information will also help to inform the housing and employment trajectories and the infrastructure delivery plan for the RLDP.

Sites in public ownership includes land owned by the Council, WG, NRW, Health Boards and other Government Departments.

GDPR requires that data protection principles, rights and obligations are applied to any personal data processing (data that the Council collects, holds and analyses) as part of the RLDP preparation process. Contact details provided in this section will be added to the Council's Candidate Sites database. Contact details will also be added to the Planning Policy Consultation Database in order to keep you informed of the RLDP process and any other emerging planning policy work (i.e. preparation of supplementary planning guidance). Please indicate whether all landowners are happy for their contact details to be kept for these purposes.

Section H: Viability

As part of the Candidate Sites Form, please indicate:

• Whether a high-level general viability statement has been provided? (Yes/ No) (If the site is being promoted through the Preferred Strategy or Deposit Consultation where a detailed viability assessment is required, please just tick 'yes')
• If the site is financially viable, whether there is sufficient uplift for the landowner to release their site for development and if relevant, sufficient value/ return on the development to provide an adequate profit margin for the developer?
• If the site is not financially viable, whether the site promoter is aware of any funding mechanisms available to make the site financially viable and whether they have access to such funding mechanisms (i.e Registered Social Landlord and Social Housing Grant)?

Viability assessments will need to be submitted using the Mid and South West Wales Development Viability Model, for which there are the following fees:

• Sites 1 to 9 residential units: £195
• Sites 10-50 residential units: £345
• Sites 51-100 residential units: £495
• Sites 100 or more residential units: £ to be agreed with Council depending on size and complexity of the proposal, but no less than £495
• Employment: £ to be agreed with the Council depending on size and complexity of the proposal

Sites promoted as part of the Call for Candidate Sites are required to:

• Submit an high-level general viability assessment (viability appraisal and statement detailing assumptions made and providing evidence to justify the assumptions made) as part of the Call for Candidate Sites; and
• If successfully filtered, prior to the Stage 2 Candidate Sites Assessment, submit a detailed viability assessment (viability appraisal and statement) using the Council's high-level viability assumptions/ justifying in the statement why other values are considered appropriate. (See 'Candidate Sites Assessment Methodology' chapter for more information).

For sites submitted as part of the Call for Candidate Sites, the Council will charge:

• £50 for a copy of the model to enable a high-level viability assessment to be prepared; and
• The remainder of the fee for successfully filtered sites, to obtain a copy of the Council's high-level viability assumptions to enable the completion of the detailed appraisal work.

Sites submitted as part of either the Preferred Strategy or Deposit Plan consultations will be required to submit a detailed viability assessment, for which the full charge will be required.

Please note:

•  The model is site specific.
• The charges cover the administration and review of the viability assessment. The charges do not include allowances for engagement between site promoters and Council Officers with regards to viability assumptions; completion of the model; or the production of a detailed viability report for the site promoter.
• Should insufficient information be submitted, the site will be considered unviable. The Council will not ask site promoters to provide additional information.

The Council encourages site promoters to provide as much detail as possible and as much evidence as possible to justify assumptions made. Information submitted during the Call for Candidate Sites will be used to help to inform the Council's High-Level Plan Wide Viability Appraisal.

To obtain a copy of the Development Viability Model, please email LDP@npt.gov.uk or telephone 01639 686821.

Please note:

 Following discussions with the Council's Legal Team and the development industry, in accordance with national planning guidance (DPM, Edition 3, 2020, Paragraph 5.95), the Council will apply an 'open book' approach to viability information submitted to ensure transparency of evidence.

Information submitted during the Call for Candidate Sites will not be made publicly available and instead will be used to inform assumptions as part of the high level viability work. This information may however need to be made publicly available should the Council receive a request via the Environmental Information Regulations or Freedom of Information Act. Should the Council receive such a request, the Council will discuss the request with the developer.

Information submitted during the detailed request for successfully filtered sites will be made available on the Council's website as part of our viability evidence base. This will include the detailed viability appraisals submitted using the DVM given that these should use the high level viability assumptions provided, or other site specific assumptions.

Any information the Council receives may need to be made publicly available should the Council receive a request via the Environmental Information Regulations or Freedom of Information Act. Should the Council receive such a request, the Council will discuss the request with the developer.

Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan Submitted Sites

Sites promoted during either the Preferred Strategy or Deposit consultations will be required to submit:

• A Candidate Sites Form; and
• Stage 1 Initial Candidate Sites Assessment; and
• Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment

Residential and employment-led sites will be required to provide a detailed viability assessment (appraisal and statement).

Failure to provide all of the above will result in the site not being progressed any further.

Stage 1 Initial Candidate Sites Assessment

Site promoters will be required to undertake the following three stage iterative filter:

• Filter 1: Site size filter (to be determined during assessment process)
• Filter 2: Fundamental constraints filter
• Filter 3: Deliverability filter

The findings of the filters should be clearly documented and evidenced in the following tables which will be provided as an interactive form/ word document as part of the Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan consultations.

Filter 1: Site Size Filter

• Does the site contain residential units? Yes/No
• If yes, does the site contain 10 or more residential units? Yes/No

Filter 2: Fundamental Constraints Filter

• Is the site located within/ overlap with Ramsar Site? Yes/No
• Is the site located within/ overlap with Special Area of Conservation (SAC)? Yes/No
• Is the site located within/ overlap with Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)? Yes/No
• Is the site located within/ overlap with National Nature Reserve? Yes/No
• Is the site located within/ overlap with Class 1 Agricultural Land Classification (ALC)? Yes/No
• Is the site located within/ overlap with Scheduled Monument (SM)? Yes/No
• Is the site located within/ overlap with Historic Park and Gardens? Yes/No
• Is development proposed by the private sector on common land? Yes/No
• Is highly vulnerable development (as defined in TAN15 (December 2021)) proposed within Flood Zone 3? Yes/No

An interactive constraints map will be provided on the Council's website in order to enable site promoters to undertake this assessment. An extract (screen shot) of the site with all of the fundamental constraints turned on should be provided as part of the Stage 1 Candidate Sites Assessment.

Filter 3: Deliverability Filter

• Is the site being promoted for development in its entirety? Yes/No
• Is the site being promoted for development in more than one landownership? If yes, are all of the landowners promoting the site for the type and scale of development envisaged?
• Is the site being promoted by the current landowner/s or on their behalf? Or if the site is being promoted by a site promoter who has an option agreement or equivalent to purchase the site from the landowner/s?
• Are there any constraints to development such as ransom strips or covenants which are not in the process of being resolved/ removed? Yes/No
• Will the site be brought forward for development within the Plan period? Yes/No
• Has viability information been provided to accompany the Candidate Site submission (residential and employment led sites)? Given that a detailed viability assessment is required to be submitted as part of the Stage 2 Detailed Viability Appraisal which is also required to be submitted for sites submitted as part of the Preferred Strategy/ Deposit Plan consultation, please just indicate whether viability information has been provided. Yes/No
• If the site is in public ownership, has it been identified in a published disposal strategy and/or through Council resolution if the land is to be retained/ sold by the Council? Yes/No

If the site has been previously allocated in the existing NPT LDP, the following filters will also apply:

Additional Deliverability Filter

• Has a clear explanation of why the site has not been brought forward for development to date been provided, including justification of how and when this will be overcome going forward (including detailed viability information where required)? Yes/No
• Has evidence been provided to demonstrate that there is a clear commitment to bring the site forward within the Plan period, including where relevant, identified/ committed funding streams? Yes/No

Please note that the Council will review the information submitted and will discount sites which we do not consider to be deliverable. As much information as possible should therefore be provided.

Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment

The Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment is a detailed site appraisal including:

• Detailed Viability Appraisal;
• Detailed ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment; and
• Engagement with infrastructure providers

Viability Appraisal

Site promoters of residential and employment-led sites will be required to submit a detailed viability assessment (appraisal and statement).

The detailed viability appraisal will need to be submitted using the Mid and South West Wales Development Viability Model, for which the following charges apply: 

• Sites 1 to 9 residential units: £195
• Sites 10-50 residential units: £345
• Sites 51-100 residential units: £495
• Sites 100 or more residential units: £ to be agreed with Council depending on size and complexity of the proposal, but no less than £495
• Employment: £ to be agreed with the Council depending on size and complexity of the proposal

Site promoters will need to contact the Council via email (LDP@npt.gov.uk) or telephone (01639 686821) to obtain a copy of the site-specific Development Viability Model. The Council will provide guidance and videos to enable the completion of the model and will provide high-level viability assumptions which will need to be taken into consideration in the preparation of the viability assessment.

A viability statement will need to be provided to accompany the viability appraisal. This should detail and provide evidence for all assumptions used. Robust evidence should be provided where assumptions are used differ from the Council's high-level viability assumptions.

Please note:

• The Council will not accept detailed viability appraisals submitted using other viability models.
• Failure to provide a detailed viability appraisal or sufficient evidence to justify assumptions will result in the site being considered unviable.
• Each copy of the Development Viability Model is site-specific.
• A detailed viability report will not be provided for site promoters.
• The fees do not allow for either completion of the model by Council Officers or engagement between Council Officers and site promoters with regards to assumptions/ completion of the model etc.

As part of the Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment, site promoters will also be required to provide information to enable the Council to complete the following table. This should include:

If the site is financially viable, confirmation:

• That there is sufficient uplift for the landowner to release their site for development; and
• That there is sufficient value/ return on the development to provide an adequate profit margin for the developer (If there is no developer interest in the site to date, it should be assumed that there is)

If the site is not financially viable, site promoters should confirm whether the site promoter/ landowner has access to any funding mechanisms that would make the site financially viable (i.e. Registered Social Landlords and Social Housing Grant).

The table will be provided as part of an interactive form/ word document as part of the Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan consultations.

Viability Appraisal Filter

• Has a detailed viability appraisal been submitted using the Mid and South West Wales Development Viability Model? Yes/No
• Does the viability appraisal submitted show the type and scale of development proposed to be financially viable? Yes/No
• Does the viability appraisal submitted use the assumptions the Council has provided (for example with regards to affordable housing/ infrastructure/ other policy costs)? If not, is evidence provided to justify why different assumptions have been used? and does the Council consider that the viability appraisal, including assumptions, submitted is appropriate? Yes/No
• If the site is financially viable, has the site promoter confirmed that there is sufficient uplift for the landowner to release their site for development? Yes/No
• If the site is financially viable, has the site promoter confirmed that there is sufficient value/ return on the development to provide an adequate profit margin for the developer/ If there is no developer interest in the site to date, it will automatically be assumed that there is. Yes/No
• If the site is not financially viable, does the site promoter/ landowner have access to any funding mechanisms that would make the site financially viable (for example, Registered Social Landlords and Social Housing Grant)? Yes/No
• Is the Council satisfied that the site is viable? Yes/No

ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment

Site promoters will be required to undertake a qualitative and quantitative ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment for the site using the assessment criteria specified within Appendices A and B.

The Council will provide an interactive constraints map to assist in the process. Further guidance will be provided within the Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan ISA Reports.

Engagement with Infrastructure Providers

The Council does not expect site promoters to engage directly with infrastructure providers.

Prior to the Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan consultations, the Council will engage with the infrastructure providers detailed within Appendix C in order to understand infrastructure requirements and constraints. Information will be provided to assist in the Initial/ Infrastructure Delivery Plan (IDP) as part of the evidence provided at Preferred Strategy/ Deposit Plan Consideration should be given to these documents as part of Candidate Site submissions.

Where appropriate, the Council will engage with infrastructure providers following the submission of sites, and where appropriate, may then subsequently engage with the site promoter/ request additional information from the site promoter.

Sufficient information should be provided as part of the Stage 2 Detailed Candidate Sites Assessment to enable the Council to complete the following table. The table will be provided as part of an interactive form/ word document as part of the Preferred Strategy and Deposit Plan consultations.

ISA and Candidate Site Suitability Assessment and Infrastructure Providers Engagement Filters

• Has a detailed ISA been undertaken? Yes/No
• Does the site contribute towards achieving the overall objectives of the Plan? i.e. Does the site have a positive impact in the context of its environment in relation to the objectives of the ISA? Yes/No
• Has the site been appraised against the Candidate Site Suitability Assessment criteria and is it considered to be suitable for development? Yes/No
• Have any infrastructure constraints been identified? Yes/No
• If infrastructure constraints have been identified, have mitigation measures been proposed which are acceptable, achievable and do not impact on the overall viability of the site and has this been confirmed by the site promoter? Yes/No
• Is the Council satisfied that the site is not contrary to the ISA and objectives of the Plan and that any infrastructure constraints can be viably mitigated? Yes/No

Appendices

Appendix A: Integrated Sustainability Appraisal

Background

Under Section 62(6) of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act (2004), emerging LDPs need to be subject to Sustainability Appraisal (SA), which is statutorily required to guide the selection and development of policies and proposals for inclusion in LDPs/ RLDPs in terms of their potential social, environmental and economic effects. The SA required for the LDP Review will need to build upon the SA, incorporating SEA, prepared for the NPT LDP 2011-2026 (adopted January 2016). As the 'Full Review' procedure is being used, the LDP Review will effectively mirror the original LDP preparation process and will result in the preparation and adoption of a RLDP (rather than the existing LDP only being subject to individual changes).

When undertaking a SA, the WG asks Local Planning Authorities (LPAs) to consider the value and opportunities for an integrated assessment approach to preparing an LDP. Paragraph 4.5 of the DPM (Edition 3, 2020) considers that "the integration of statutory and key elements such as the Well Being of Future Generations Assessment (WBFGA) 2015 requirements, Equalities Act, Welsh language and Health Impact Assessment (HIA) (when relevant) into a single ISA will enable a more transparent, holistic and rounded assessment of the sustainability implications of growth options, objectives, policies and proposals". Accordingly, to achieve these benefits whilst meeting applicable statutory requirements, an ISA is to be carried out for the NPT LDP Review. The ISA Scoping Report represents the first stage of this process.

To enable the ISA to be undertaken in a proportionate and targeted manner the ISA Framework detailed in this appendix will be used. It is comprised of:

• Proposed ISA Objectives;
• A suite of relevant Guide Questions relating to each ISA Objective which will be used in a qualitative assessment of each emerging substantive component of the RLDP, and any identified reasonable alternatives, to proportionately identify their likely significant effect (LSE)); and
• A suite of sustainability indicators which will be considered in the assessment of candidate sites. These indicators are designed to guide the site assessment process. They support a legally compliant ISA that identifies statutory impacts assessment requirements.

ISA of Candidate Sites

An integrated site assessment process will be carried out by NPT Council (NPTC) to satisfy ISA requirements (including SEA) and to select site allocations for inclusion in the RLDP. This will identify the strategic sites needed to deliver the RLDP Preferred Strategy.

Owing to the strategic level and nature of the Candidate Site allocations that are likely to be included within the RLDP Pre-Deposit Document, it may be appropriate in some cases to adopt the same approach as for the RLDP proposed spatial strategies and policies in terms of focusing on their compatibility with the ISA Framework. However, the ISA will seek to identify site-specific and relevant sustainability issues, disproportionate effects on groups with protected characteristics, those vulnerable to social exclusion or poverty and those facing socio-economic disadvantage, and appropriate mitigation or enhancement measures which should be incorporated within candidate strategic site allocations as they are developed further for the RLDP Deposit Document (see Paragraph 6.5.2 ISA Scoping Report for more information). Where possible, the ISA of the candidate strategic site allocations will determine whether they are likely to result in any significant effects.

The assessment criteria specified in the ISA Framework relate to the sustainability indicators and ISA objectives within the ISA Framework. The ISA Reports accompanying the LDP Pre-Deposit and LDP Deposit Documents will demonstrate that the site assessment criteria and process adopted by NPTC satisfy statutory ISA requirements and sufficiently relate to the ISA Objectives identified within the ISA Framework for the LDP Review.

An iterative desktop-based appraisal utilising GIS software and relevant assessment criteria will be undertaken of all Candidate Sites excluding those discounted from further consideration owing to being below minimum site sizes to determine whether their allocation would have any LSEs. All Candidate Sites submitted to NPT within the defined RLDP Call for Sites period and not discounted due to site size will then be subject to a proportionate level of ISA using the pre-determined appraisal criteria and scoring system specified in the Framework below, with the findings detailed within the ISA Reports for the RLDP Pre-Deposit and Deposit Documents.

All sites submitted to NPTC during the RLDP Call for Candidate Sites and not rejected on grounds of deliverability during the intended RLDP period will be treated as 'reasonable alternatives' and thus subject to an equal level of assessment up to RLDP Pre-Deposit stage. At this point the preferred RLDP Vision and Objectives will be published for consultation, meaning that any further site assessment carried out for the RLDP Deposit Document would only need to consider Candidate Sites which align with the RLDP Vision and Objectives (as all other sites would then be 'not reasonable').

At both RLDP Pre-Deposit and Deposit stages a second level qualitative assessment will also be undertaken to test the ability of all identified reasonable alternative sites at each stage, and at Deposit stage of the combined suite of proposed site allocations, to address WBFGA 2015, Equality Act 2010, Welsh language and HIA requirements

Framework

Appendix B: Site Suitability

In addition to the ISA criteria, consideration will also be given to the following in order to identify the suitability of the site:

• Buildings of Local Importance;
• Compatibility with neighbouring uses (light, noise)
• Conservation Areas and their settings;
• Disused railway or freight transport infrastructure;
• Existing use of the site;
• Green wedge;
• Land contamination;
• Land instability;
• Mineral Safeguarding Areas;
• Pre-Assessed Area for Wind Development;
• Quiet areas;
• Safe access to the site for all users;
• Site search sequence (see PPW, Paragraphs 3.41-3.48);
• Sequential approach in national policy (see Future Wales Policy Policy 6 and PPW Paragraphs 4.3.18-4.3.24) for retail, education, health, leisure and public services;
• SuDS;
• Water (including groundwater pollution);
• Whether development would lead to the loss of existing playing fields and/or recreational space?;
• Whether the site would lead to the redevelopment of previously developed land (see PPW, pp. 37)?; and
• Undeveloped coast;

Please note that other criteria may be taken into consideration as part of the assessment work. Where this is the case, this will be clearly identified Candidate Sites Assessment work.

Appendix C: Infrastructure Providers

The Council will engage with the following where appropriate.

Table C.0.1 Infrastructure Providers

Infrastructure Type	Delivery Agency
Biodiversity and Ecology	British Geological Survey Cadw Centre for Ecology and Hydrology Neath Port Talbot Biodiversity Forum NPTC Countryside and Wildlife NRW
Community Facilities	NPTC Community Services Team
Education	NPTC Education Neath Port Talbot Group of Colleges
Flood risk and surface water management	NRW NPTC SAB and Highway Development Welsh Government
Green Infrastructure and Recreation Space	NPTC Countryside and Wildlife NPTC Planning Policy (Green Infrastructure and Recreation Space) NPTC Play NRW
Health	Public Health Wales Swansea Bay University Health Board
Heritage	Cadw Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust NPTC Environmental Design and Heritage Officer Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Wales
Natural Environment	British Geological Survey Canal and Rivers Trust Coal Authority Dwr Cymru Welsh Water Glamorgan/ Gwent Archaeological Trust NPTC Countryside and Wildlife NPTC Highways and Drainage NRW
Transport	2 B's First Busses Ltd. Great First Western Network Rail Infrastructure Ltd (Western and Wales) Property  Network Rail Ltd NPTC Active Travel NPTC Highways and Drainage Services NPTC Rights of Way South Wales Trunk Road Agent (SWTRA) Transport for Wales Welsh Government
Utilities	British Gas BT Group Plc BT Open Reach HQ Centrica Energy Dwr Cymru Welsh Water Ecotricity EDF Energy EE Good Energy Hutchinson 3G UK Ltd. Mid and West Wales Fire Service National Grid NPTC Education O2 Sports Council for Wales South Wales Fire and Rescue Service SSE/ SWALEC Tesco Mobile LMT Transco United Utilities Utilita Energy Virgin Media Vodaphone Group Plc Western Power Wales and West Utilities Ltd Welsh Ambulance Service
Waste and Recycling	NPTC Waste and Neighbourhood Services

In addition to the above, where appropriate, the Council will engage with the key stakeholder groups, specific consultation bodies and general and other consultation bodies detailed in the DA.

Appendix D: Candidate Sites Submission Form

Download this document as a pdf