Appendix F The Settlement Hierarchy

As set out in earlier comments, the Claybrookes does not meet the criteria for SRV status - Majority of households are not within an acceptable and safe walking distance of the school in Parva so unjustifiable designation

Stoughton Parish Council strongly support our inclusion under 'Other Villages and Rural Settlements' in Appendix F/

We Object to the criteria for defining Other Villages and Rural Settlements - see table D.23.

It is unclear why the size of a settlement in terms of household numbers has any bearing whatsoever in terms of its sustainability, as set out and defined in the Framework. This policy is currently unjustified and without evidential basis accordingly.

Previous versions of this policy i.e. the currently adopted Core Strategy had a very similar policy considering sustainability of settlements by way of the number and nature of services contained therein or nearby, but there is nothing regarding the size of the settlement to further restrict housing delivery.

If a settlement has a suitable range of services to meet day to day or wider needs, why, purely as a function of its scale, does this render it less sustainable in planning terms, This does not make logical sense, Further this policy as drafted acts as a barrier to housing delivery in otherwise sustainable locations (as per the Framework definition) as a result.

I am writing this regarding the proposed District Plan with specific reference to the Parish of Arnesby. Under the new proposal several areas previously designated as "important open space" have had that designation quite rightly removed. They do not serve either the 'public' or any other 'important' function. However it would appear that the Parish Council are unreasonably committed to preventing any small scale infill building within Arnesby and seem to be pushing to have such designations retained. Arnesby has become an exclusive village and over the years the lack of affordable housing has driven away those born and bred in the village in my case where generations of my family have lived and worked. Continuing with such restrictions will stifle and limit the community as young and old will be unable to afford to live in what could quite easily become an exclusive commuter estate - with no local amenities. I hope the Planners will be allowed to put through a plan that allows for reasonable infill so that Arnesby can be a family community not just
an exclusive housing development.

Tilton on the Hill and Halstead Parish Council seeks Tilton's re-classification as "Other Villages and Rural Settlements".
Tilton does not have a GP surgery or primary school within acceptable walking distance. The library van calls monthly, 4 residents access this service, thus a threat of withdrawal. The post office is an outreach service in the foyer of our village hall two afternoons a week, the post office employee will be leaving with the possible closure of this facility. The public house closed on 20th July and will remain so for the foreseeable future.
Tilton has a shop.

On behalf of my client, Richborough Estates, I write to submit representations to the consultation on the Harborough District Local Plan: Submission Version. These representations relate to land Richborough is currently promoting for residential development at Kimcote Road, Gilmorton. The site was subject to a recent outline planning application for up to 43 houses (ref 17/00885/OUT), which now has a resolution to grant planning consent following the meeting of Planning Committee on 3 October 2017.
We support the strategic priorities identified in the Local Plan, and in particular the objective of meeting housing needs for both Harborough District and the wider Leicester and Leicestershire Housing Market Area (HMA). However, the local planning authority must ensure that the strategy taken to meeting these priorities takes full account of the most recent evidence of housing need for the HMA, and in particular the fact that both Leicester City and Oadby and Wigston District Councils have confirmed that they will not be able to meet their full needs within their own administrative areas.
If the Harborough Local Plan is to be adopted in advance of the extent of unmet need being confirmed, or its distribution between the remaining authorities in the HMA being agreed, a firm policy commitment must be made to undertake a prompt review of the Local Plan to address these matters at the earliest possible opportunity. In the meantime, and in anticipation of the role Harborough is expected to play in meeting unmet need in the HMA, it would be prudent for the overall level of development and range of identified sites to be increased. Such an approach will ensure that the Local Plan is sound at the time of examination, and capable of providing the certainty and plan-led approach which is required.
The distribution of development set out in Policy SS1 The Spatial Strategy, and in particular the identification of Selected Rural Villages (SRVs) to accommodate appropriate levels of growth, is supported. However, consideration should be given to the allocation in the Local Plan of sites across all tiers of the settlement hierarchy for which growth is planned. For SRVs where options for growth are limited, and/or Neighbourhood Plans which allocate housing sites are not being taken forward, the allocation of sites in the Local Plan will ensure the delivery of sufficient levels of development across the full range of the settlement hierarchy. This will reduce the risk of certain settlements and tiers of the hierarchy not making their required contribution to meeting Harborough's housing requirements, and ensure that the plan is both effective and positively prepared. The failure to make such allocations could risk the plan not being found sound.
We broadly support the distribution of development as defined in Policy H1 Provision of New Housing, and the proposed levels of development in the SRVs being expressed as minima. We also support the identification of Gilmorton as a SRV, which correctly reflects the range of services and facilities available in the village and confirms its sustainability and suitability as a location for growth.
The deliverability of Richborough Estates' site at Kimcote Road is demonstrated by the Planning Committee's resolution to grant planning consent on 3 October 2017, subject to completion of a Section 106 agreement which is now close to being finalised. It is anticipated that the site will be marketed before the end of 2017, to enable to swift submission of reserved matters and commencement of delivery on this sustainable site in 2018.
I trust these representations are of assistance and will be taken into consideration. If you have any queries or require any further information then please do not hesitate to contact me.