Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Search Representations

Results for Strutt & Parker LLP search

New search New search

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy CP2: Managing Growth

Representation ID: 1206

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: Strutt & Parker LLP

Representation Summary:

We consider that development on the edge of settlements (i.e. the rural areas) provides a sustainable form of development in accordance with national policy. The NPPF acknowledges that development in the rural areas will differ in its sustainability when judged against development in the urban areas, but this need not mean that planning permission cannot be granted.
We consider that the policy should be amended to reflect the need and benefits of providing development in rural areas, and in particular adjacent to rural settlements.

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy DM16: Re-use and Residential Conversions of Rural Buildings

Representation ID: 1208

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: Strutt & Parker LLP

Representation Summary:

With regards to residential, part (f) this policy is inconsistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (paragraph 55). The NPPF confirms that new isolated homes in the countryside are acceptable if they would re-use redundant or disused buildings and lead to an enhancement of the immediate setting. There is no such requirement for marketing exercises to be completed and the building need not form part of a group of buildings. This is evident by the reference to "new isolated homes" which sets the context for paragraph 55. This policy should be amended to be consistent with the NPPF.

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy DM24: Affordable Housing

Representation ID: 1209

Received: 01/10/2013

Respondent: Strutt & Parker LLP

Representation Summary:

This policy does not provide clarification on the level of contribution which would be required from schemes of 1-4 dwellings. The policy would seem to suggest that a unit could be provided on-site by such sized schemes. However, this contradicts the distinction placed on schemes of 5-7 units and those of 1-4 units. Furthermore, in terms of a financial contribution, it is not clear how this is to be calculated or determined. Without such information, this policy cannot be supported and is considered to be unsound. The policy should be amended to provide further clarification.

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.