Policy DM2: Effective Site Planning
Object
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 491
Received: 02/10/2013
Respondent: Brentwood School
Agent: JTS Partnership LLP
With respect to Policy DM2 we recommend a minor amendment that the word only be deleted from the first sentence of that Policy as its inclusion is unnecessary and unduly onerous.
See attached
Support
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 567
Received: 02/10/2013
Respondent: Hansteen Holdings Plc
Agent: McGough Planning Consultants
Hansteen support this policy.
See attached
Object
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 822
Received: 02/10/2013
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Barton Willmore
We would question whether Policy DM2 is required as this policy appears to duplicate Policy DM1. Whilst we acknowledge that development proposals are required to address links with adjoining sites, incorporate features of value and design-out crime, these could be (and arguably are already) incorporated within Policy DM1.
See attached
Comment
Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation
Representation ID: 981
Received: 16/09/2013
Respondent: Campaign for the Protection of Rural England (CPRE) Brentwood Branch
Page 77 paragraph 'd' states - "Safeguard the amenities of occupiers or any nearby properties by ensuring that their character and appearance is sensitive to the context and surroundings"
We believe this policy should be modified to show that implementation of this policy should be safeguarded by planning applications having to explicitly demonstrate how compliance with this policy has been achieved.
See attached