Object

Representation ID: 464

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Sans Souci Enterprises Limited

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

As currently worded, this policy is unacceptable. It states that planning permission will be refused where a proposal has any adverse impact on matters such as visual amenity, the character or appearance of the surrounding area, highway conditions or highway safety, health, environment or amenity etc.
By definition, very few forms of development do not have an adverse impact. The policy needs to be reworded to reflect this and the phrase "no significant unacceptable impact‟ (or similar words to that effect) needs to be added to each of the criteria.

Object

Representation ID: 465

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Sans Souci Enterprises Limited

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

The Council may seek a mixed use development of the Wates Way site. At the residential density implied by identifying the site for 128 units, the Company does not consider this to be feasible and requests that the policy/appendix be amended to reflect this.

As the Council is aware, the Wates Way Industrial Estate is more than half vacant, with the remaining leases due to expire within the next 12/18 months. Accordingly, the Estate will be available for development during the first year of the Plan period and any phasing provisions should recognise this.

Support

Representation ID: 466

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Sans Souci Enterprises Limited

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

The Company fully supports the Council‟s decision to identify the Wates Way Industrial Estate as a major residential site capable of accommodating circa 128 dwellings.

Object

Representation ID: 468

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Sans Souci Enterprises Limited

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

Whilst the Company recognises the need to provide affordable housing within the Borough, it welcomes the Council‟s understanding that such provision can potentially impact upon the viability of a scheme. Accordingly, it welcomes, and supports, the final paragraph of the policy. It also considers that the policy should not seek any affordable housing provision on sites of less than 15 units. On smaller sites (14 units and below) it is often physically, or logistically, difficult, or financial disadvantageous, to include affordable housing on site. These problems become more acute, the smaller the site gets.

Support

Representation ID: 469

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Sans Souci Enterprises Limited

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

The Company welcomes the flexibility built into the policy in the second paragraph and would resist the removal, or the watering down, of this part of the policy.

Object

Representation ID: 471

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Sans Souci Enterprises Limited

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

As with affordable housing policy DM24, the need to provide 5% Lifetime Homes dwellings, in all new developments of 20 dwellings or more, should be subject to a viability assessment.

Comment

Representation ID: 472

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Sans Souci Enterprises Limited

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

The Company considers that the Borough Council should give consideration as to how the requirements of the second paragraph relate to the guidance set out in Circular 11/95: Use of Conditions in Planning Permissions. Whilst it may be good practice to request that a Phase 1 Desk-Top Study be submitted with
the planning application, Phase 2 and Phase 3 matters can often be dealt with by condition.