Support

Representation ID: 1125

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Highcross

Agent: Rapleys LLP

We support policy S1 which seeks to protect GB land by focusing the majority of new development on land within accessible settlements. Our clients site (academy place, corner of Brooke St and Spital Lane) would be a suitable location for alternative uses or potentially redevelopment and qualifies under the requirements of this policy.

Object

Representation ID: 1135

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Highcross

Agent: Rapleys LLP

Policy S3 advises of the future requirement for additional employment land and that research has shown that there is currently on-going demand for business premises. Our clients site at Academy Place has not expereinced that and therefore we consider that the strategy should recognise that not all sites continue to be attractive to the market. Where sites are no longer suitable for employment, as in this case, as evidenced by long periods of vacancy and on-going marketing, then the policy should recognise that alternative uses, either through re-use or redevelopment should be acceptable to help meet plan requirements.

Object

Representation ID: 1136

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Highcross

Agent: Rapleys LLP

We understand that the sequential requirements for the location of retail and other town centres uses need to be directed towards the town centre in a "town centre first" approach required by NPFF. We also recognise that neighbourhood/local centres help provide local services and these too must be supported. We consider the location of our clients site, is within such a neighbourhood and should be protected by a local shopping boundary. On this basis we respectively request that the site and surrounding area, which has numerous existing town centre uses, is identified as a local/ neighbourhood centre.

Support

Representation ID: 1148

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Highcross

Agent: Rapleys LLP

We agree that the policy should confirm the presumption in favour of sustainable development as per NPPF. Furthermore we recognise the support given, in principle, to the flexible use of land and the priority in favour of the re-use of previously developed land. We consider our clients site, represents a suitable brownfield site which has been unable to attract suitable re-use and therefore the Council should afford greatr flexibility to its re-use.

Support

Representation ID: 1149

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Highcross

Agent: Rapleys LLP

We agree that the policy should confirm the presumption in favour of sustainable development as per NPPF. Furthermore we recognise the support given, in principle, to the flexible use of land and the priority in favour of the re-use of previously developed land. We consider our clients site, represents a suitable brownfield site which has been unable to attract suitable re-use and therefore the Council should afford greater flexibility to its re-use.

Object

Representation ID: 1157

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Highcross

Agent: Rapleys LLP

This policy fails to recognise that there will be instances where floorspace cannot be re-let for continuing employment use. We object to the policy by its omission to confirm thee maybe instances where the re-use of existing employment sites which are not able to attract new users is acceptable. This is contrary to DM6 andthe rules of exception. We object to existing employment land allocations being carried over from the previous plan, without consideration of how existing employment sites contribute to the employment supply or how they maybe suitable for other uses.

Support

Representation ID: 1167

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Highcross

Agent: Rapleys LLP

This policy is supported in that it allows development outside the borough's primary shopping centres of up to 2,500sqm without requiring a retail assessment.