IN1 clause 1

Infrastruction is currently inadequate for Magna Park and Lutterworth East.
A426 needs to be dual carriageway from M6 to A5 and from A5 to Lutterworth

A426 needs a bypass around Lutterworth centre. A "spine Road" for Lutterworth East is totally inadequate and needs to be a bypass parallel to the M1 from the Jct 20 raoudabout to the proposed new bridge north of Lutterworth.

lutterworth centre needs a weight limit, as 3000 lorries a day currently use it, which will grow.

The A426 South of Lutterworth, the main route from M1 south to M6 north, and route used by commuters from Lutterworth, to Coventry, Rugby(inc London via train) and Birmingham. It is currently congested and when incidents occur south of junction 20 of the M1 the A426 and the A5 south become completely grid-locked. These incidents occur on a weekly basis. Any further development commercial or housing will make this situation worse.

Support in principle. However, a developers view of "sufficient " may be rather different to that of residents struggling to get a Drs appointment or to get their child into a local school .Sufficient is also an issue for the Local Transport Authority regarding access to and from developments and the impact of through traffic upon communities. This is especially true where through routes such as Grange Lane ,Main St and Station Lane etc are already under immense pressure and in reality have seen no mitigating measures. Public transport provision is poor.

Air quality is a major consequential concern .

Infrastructure should be provided ahead of when it is required and not at some date afterwards

Thurnby and Bushby Parish Council supports as sound.

Vision and objectives: Support
promote healthy and safe lifestyles.

- There will be better access to the countryside and an improved range
of open spaces for local people to enjoy
- increased provision for walking and cycling, and improved access to public transport for new development will have contributed to a reduction in the District's carbon footprint.
- Communities will have access to improved social, recreational, sports, health and
educational facilities.

Key Issue - growth in the economy and Objective 2. Employment:
Sport England would advise of our economic value of sport toolkit
https://www.sportengland.org/research/benefits-of-sport/economic-value-of-sport/
and more generally
https://www.nomisweb.co.uk/reports/lmp/la/1946157347/report.aspx

Objective 4 Infrastructure: Support

Objective 9 Design: Support. With particular reference to bringing forward strategic development areas of East Lutterworth and Scraptoft (policy SC1) with regard to
Active design - Sport England, in conjunction with Public Health England, has produced 'Active Design' (October 2015), a guide to planning new developments that create the right environment to help people get more active, more often in the interests of health and wellbeing. The guidance sets out ten key principles for ensuring new developments incorporate opportunities for people to take part in sport and physical activity. The Active Design principles are aimed at contributing towards the Government's desire for the planning system to promote healthy communities through good urban design. Sport England would commend the use of the guidance in the master planning process for new residential developments. The document can be downloaded via the following link:
http://www.sportengland.org/facilities-planning/planning-for-sport/planning-tools-and-guidance/active-design/

Support Policy GD3 - b. outdoor sport and recreation and associated buildings

Support GD7 2a. permitting development if it relates to outdoor leisure, sporting or recreation facilities including school playing fields, cycleways, footpaths or bridleways;.

Support policy GD8 - Design which in explanation refers to our guidance on active design. We would ask if the use of active design would be made stronger by reference in the policy. (also covered in policy IN2) also should be referenced in SC1, MH1, MH2 and LH1

Support in principle Policy HC2 - Evidence who demonstrates that a facility is no longer required. We are unsure what evidence is available to understand the demand, supply and needs for built sports facilities. This is even more relevant with regard to policy IN1.

G12 this policy is supported in principle particularly around the use of the emerging Playing Pitch Strategy 2017 which details not only the provision requirements but also quality improvements which could meet the demands generated by development. (please see attached) We are concerned with regard to the reference to and accessibility standard 4km or 10mins drive/bus this is not appropriate in all circumstances and not for all sports. The catchment for football is different to that for cricket and other sports. The emerging playing pitch strategy will provide more information on this aspect. The playing pitch strategy should also be the evidence needed for the robust assessment referred under G12.2.a. with regard to playing fields.

It is not clear if the plan fully details with the needs for new or replacement built sports facilities particularly sports halls and swimming pools (leisure centres) having regard to Para 70 of NPPF and the requirement to plan positively
.

Local plan consultation response.

10.1.3 New built development should be designed to reduce carbon emissions as close to zero as practicable. Design and Access Statements accompanying planning applications for major developments should identify cost effective approaches to low carbon development, which will be guided by the energy hierarchy. This requires that the design of any development should consider use of the following energy options in priority order:
* passive design considered first as a means to reduce emissions,
* then the energy efficient design of building services, including decentralised energy networks,
* and finally, including renewable energy at building or site level.

Commercial volume developers will always engineer a way in which they can deliver housing at the maximum profitability to themselves. With the Council having been barred in law, by the deregulation bill, from specifying higher building specifications they should instead develop a robust model by which to appraise developer viability assessments to ensure that they do not over inflate their costs in order to escape their moral responsibilities.
With the potential for rules regarding Councils building/commissioning housing there should be a provision to ensure the Council will always develop to the highest thermal standards to BRE's Home Quality Mark sustainability standard: http://www.homequalitymark.com

There should be a provision for all new builds to produce at least 15% of their energy requirements onsite. Commercial developments should require a 40% BER improvement, this means that they will probably have to incorporate one or a combination of the following:
a) highly insulated building fabric
b) photovoltaic arrays
c) a CHP unit or connection to an existing District Heat Network

Local authorities can require commercial refurbishments to meet BREEAM Refurbishment and Fit-Out standards, as a minimum BREEAM 'Very Good' is recommended: http://www.breeam.com/refurbishment-and-fit-out

The following sustainability requirements are recommended for inclusion in Local Plans: Considerate Constructors Scheme registration, cycle storage standards, minimum daylighting standards, ecological mitigation and enhancement, environmental impact of materials, external lighting (low energy), flood risk assessments (FRA) and site waste management plans (SWMP).

The above requirements can be implemented through a Sustainability Checklist. Applicants would be required to must submit a completed sustainability checklist when a planning application is made. Richmond Upon Thames Council has successfully operated such a checklist for a number years (London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames (2016) Sustainable Construction Checklist. Available at: http://www.richmond.gov.uk/scc_spd_guidance_0116.pdf).

The majority of the homes in Harborough District are of a low thermal performance and their improvement will perhaps make the biggest contribution. For refurbishment planning applications, the BREEAM for Domestic Refurbishment standard can be applied if included in the Local Plan or associated guidance. As a minimum it is recommended that housing undergoing refurbishment achieves a BREEAM 'Very Good' rating: http://www.breeam.com/index.jsp?id=1182 and the Passive Haus Enerphit standard introduced to householders as an option.
Can a provision be made within Council tax banding to support higher standard buildings?

10.3.3 The Planning for Climate Change: Renewable Energy Opportunities study, May 2008 found that wind turbines, biomass plants (including combined heat and power), solar thermal heating, photovoltaic energy, and energy from waste all have a potential to be utilised and developed within the District. The assessment identified wind energy as a noteworthy source of potential renewable energy generation for the District.
This definition should exclude incineration and Energy from waste solutions. These are not only detrimental to the health of the local population through the emissions of dioxins they also have the legacy of toxic fly ash that needs to be land filled as well as creating a need for large volumes of rubbish which diverts potential waste streams from the local recycling industry.

10.3.6 Community owned energy is an important means of engaging communities with their own energy generation. Community owned energy projects are encouraged within the District. A local community energy company has been set up as part of the Sustainable Harborough Challenge, called Harborough Energy, specifically to enable community owned renewable energy projects. The first two solar projects were commissioned in 2016.
There was some confusion at the beginning of this project, it was called simply "Sustainable Harborough"

11 Infrastructure IN1 Infrastructure provision
1. Major development will be permitted where there is, or will be when needed, sufficient infrastructure capacity to support and meet all the requirements arising from it, including those away from the site and its immediate vicinity, whether within Harborough District or outside.
2. Direct provision and/or financial contributions towards meeting all the eligible costs of infrastructure directly required by a major development (or cumulatively with other major developments within Harborough District or outside) will be sought from the scheme promoter whenever this is necessary. Planning obligations under Section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) will be required taking into account the viability of the development. This will be in addition to the affordable housing requirement as set out in Policy H2.

Is there a mechanism included to gather contributions from developers who phase their developments in such a way as to avoid developer contributions but cumulatively place a great burden on the local facilities.

11.3.5 The Council is anxious to ensure that both the occupiers and users of new development, and those elsewhere who may be affected by it indirectly, will not be subjected to below acceptable standards of air quality. Therefore, in controlling the potential impact of development upon air quality, the Council will require an effective air pollution mitigation strategy if a development proposal would be likely to either:
* have a moderate adverse, or worse, impact upon air quality within an existing Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) whether the proposal is inside or outside of that AQMA; or
* contribute directly or indirectly to the declaration of another AQMA be it in this district or an adjoining one.

This clause can only be met if monitoring of the local area has been undertaken for 1 year to establish a baseline. For instance, HDC only has a single monitoring point in the settlement of Harborough. Who knows what affects development will have around the town without a baseline.
Developers should be made to provide the council with the funding to gather this information and the viability assessments should include a worst case provision for mitigation should it be needed.

National Grid has appointed Amec Foster Wheeler to review and respond to development plan consultations on its behalf.
We have reviewed the above Consultation document and can confirm that National Grid has no comments to make in response to this consultation.
FURTHER ADVICE
National Grid is happy to provide advice and guidance to the Council concerning our networks. If we can be of any assistance to you in providing informal comments in confidence during your policy development, please do not hesitate to contact us.
To help ensure the continued safe operation of existing and equipment and to facilitate future infrastructure investment, National Grid wishes to be involved in the preparation, alteration and review of plans and strategies which may affect our assets. Please remember to consult National Grid on any Development Plan Document (DPD) or site-specific proposals that could affect our infrastructure