Support

Representation ID: 29876

Received: 26/11/2021

Respondent: Stonebond Properties Ltd

Agent: Phase 2 Planning and Development Ltd

Supports the modification to part B (renewable energy) which recognises that it will not be possible in all major
development to provide 10% of the energy demands of the development from renewable energy, and that any
shortfall against target can be met through S106 or CIL contributions or an off site provision.

Object

Representation ID: 29877

Received: 26/11/2021

Respondent: Stonebond Properties Ltd

Agent: Phase 2 Planning and Development Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

The provision of self and custom build should be amended to be consistent with the wording of Policy HP01. This refinement will prevent any ambiguity during the determination of planning applications on land at Policy R03. This approach has already been reflected in Policy R01, which requires ‘self-build and custom build plots in line accordance with Policy HP01’.

Object

Representation ID: 29878

Received: 26/11/2021

Respondent: Stonebond Properties Ltd

Agent: Phase 2 Planning and Development Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Modifications would benefit from refinement to accord with policy MG05 (Developer Contributions) which relates requirements back to national policy and legal tests.

Object

Representation ID: 29879

Received: 26/11/2021

Respondent: Stonebond Properties Ltd

Agent: Phase 2 Planning and Development Ltd

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Objects to modifications to part B of the policy which seeks to group sites together that are capable of delivering more than 500 units and requires them to include energy masterplans that incorporate a decentralised energy infrastructure. Concerned that these modifications proposed will have significant impacts on scheme viability and deliverability, which has not been considered within the Local Plan evidence base.

Object

Representation ID: 29880

Received: 26/11/2021

Respondent: Stonebond Properties Ltd

Agent: Phase 2 Planning and Development Ltd

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Objects to the revision of policy HP01 part C that would seek to reduce the threshold from 500 units to 100 or
more dwellings where part a. and b. would apply. These modifications proposed will have significant impacts on
scheme viability and deliverability on schemes of a 100 units or more, which does not have the same critical mass as a larger strategic scale 500 + unit schemes, to accommodate diversified housing types and models.

Object

Representation ID: 30277

Received: 02/12/2021

Respondent: Stonebond Properties Ltd

Agent: Strutt & Parker LLP

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Proposed change requires contributions to infrastructure “as set out in the Infrastructure Delivery Plan…where such contributions are compliant with national policy and the legal tests’. We suggest there would be merit
in expressly referencing the criteria regarding a legally compliant contribution within the policy itself.
The tying of contributions to the IDP is considered somewhat problematic as it is a live document subject to change and the IDP is not subject to a level of scrutiny to ensure the contributions it demands are justified, reasonable and viable, in the same way a Local Plan or CIL Charging Schedule would be.

Object

Representation ID: 30285

Received: 02/12/2021

Respondent: Stonebond Properties Ltd

Agent: Strutt & Parker LLP

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Current wording could result in the decision maker inferring proportionate contributions towards highway infrastructure should be required of developments, even if such infrastructure was not directly related to the development proposed and/or unnecessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms.

Object

Representation ID: 30287

Received: 02/12/2021

Respondent: Stonebond Properties Ltd

Agent: Strutt & Parker LLP

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

In relation to contributions that might be sought from it towards infrastructure, policy text should be clear contributions should only be demanded where necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, directly related to the development and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.