GD2 clause 1b

Showing comments and forms 1 to 2 of 2

Object

Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 5365

Received: 17/11/2017

Respondent: Persimmon Homes (South Midlands) Ltd

Agent: Pegasus Group

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation Summary:

This element of the Policy duplicates the previous criterion and Policy H1 and is therefore unnecessary.

Full text:

The scale of development appropriate for individual settlements is set out in Policy H1 and as such this criterion of Policy GD2 is unnecessary. However, the principle that the size of a settlement and the level of service provision within that settlement is material to the level of growth is supported.

As set out in response to Policy SS1, Fleckney is the fifth largest settlement in the district, it has all the key services, and a range of additional services and facilities, including a Sports Centre. It also has a substantial amount of employment land and spare capacity in the primary school. The settlement profile acknowledges that on this basis, Fleckney has the capacity to accommodate a significant amount of growth. Fleckney should therefore receive significant levels of growth.

Object

Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission

Representation ID: 7615

Received: 03/11/2017

Respondent: Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Ms Lydia Voyias

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation Summary:

Whilst support is given to the settlement hierarchy contained within Draft Policy SS1, this policy does not specifically direct any development to Broughton Astley despite the settlement being identified as capable of sustaining expansion, infill and redevelopment. Passing reference is made to 'made Neighbourhood Plans'.

Policy SS1 criteria v) and vi) make allowance for 'non-allocated' and 'windfall sites' but these are directed to the less sustainable settlements in the District rather than the Key Centres. This is not considered to be a positively prepared policy.

This approach is similarly repeated at Draft Policy GD2 'Settlement Development' and Draft Policy H1.

Full text:

Key Issue 1 of the Proposed Submission Local Plan is 'The spatial strategy for distribution of housing and employment development', determining an appropriate distribution of housing and employment growth that takes account of strategic growth locations, the settlement hierarchy, and the ability to provide essential utilities and infrastructure, whilst safeguarding local heritage and sensitive landscapes.'

Appendix F of the Proposed Submission Local Plan is entitled 'The Settlement Hierarchy'. It explains at page 252 that "Settlements at the top of the hierarchy are considered to be the most suitable in terms of accessibility to services, facilities, shops, employment opportunities and public transport provision. These settlements are therefore the most capable of supporting further development whilst meeting the everyday needs of their residents and thus minimising the need to travel." General support is given to this approach to sustainable development across the district.

Draft Policy SS1 'The Spatial Strategy' for the District seeks to direct development to "the most appropriate locations in accordance with the following settlement hierarchy." The Council proposes to primarily direct development to the Leicester Principal Urban; then to Market Harborough the Sub-regional Centre'; then to the Key Centres of Lutterworth and Broughton Astley. Beyond this are the 'Rural Centre', 'Selected Rural Villages', and 'Other Villages, Rural Settlements and the Countryside.

Appendix D of the Proposed Submission Local Plan is entitled 'Spatial Portrait', page 231 identifies that at the time of the Census 2011, the district's population was mostly concentrated in the larger settlements of Market Harborough, Lutterworth and Broughton Astley (47%). It also noted at page 233 that Market Harborough and the Key Centres of Lutterworth and Broughton Astley provide the most services and facilities for the District.

Broughton Astley is classified as a Key Centre and as such identified at 'Table D.20 Key Centres' the settlement benefits from a range of retail, service, and employment and is a significant residential area. The Council's stated approach to development is that Key Centres are "Settlements capable of sustaining expansion, infill and redevelopment on a scale which reflects their good levels of services, facilities and employment." It is clear that the Council has justified Broughton Astley as a Key Centre settlement within the Settlement Hierarchy.

Policy SS1 however does not specifically direct any new development to Broughton Astley over the plan period. Reference is made at criteria I) to "about 7,915 dwellings already completed or committed, including through planning permissions, resolutions to grant permission and allocations in made neighbourhood plans".

Curiously, the Council identifies at criteria v) "about 790 dwellings on non-allocated sites or sites to be allocated in neighbourhood plans for Rural Centres and Selected Rural Villages" (emphasis added). The National Planning Policy framework identifies 'non-allocated' or 'windfall' sites as: "Sites which have not been specifically identified as available in the local plan process. They normally comprise previously-developed sites that have unexpectedly become available." It is questioned why the Council wishes to direct such development to the less sustainable settlements in the District rather than the Key Centres. This is not considered to be a positively prepared policy.

The Council's justification as set out at paragraph 5.1.18 "In order to provide choice in the housing market, provide a mix of sites and make sites available to small and medium size house builders, the Local Plan also makes provision for smaller housing sites. Provision of smaller sites will be made through: the delivery of existing small site commitments; 'windfall' sites (as defined in the NPPF glossary) and small sites identified in the SHLAA that accord with policies GD2 Settlement Development." (emphasis added). The Councils interpretation of windfall sites is at odds with the National Planning Policy Framework definition as it specifically refers to 'smaller sites'.

Further Draft Policy GD2 Settlement development states that "1. In addition to sites allocated by this Local Plan and neighbourhood plans, development within or contiguous with the existing or committed built up area of Market Harborough, Key Centres, the Leicester Principal Urban Area (PUA), Rural Centres and Selected Rural Villages will be permitted" subject to criteria including cross reference to Policy H1. Again this policy is not considered to either effective or positively prepared because it limits windfall development to less sustainable settlements.

Paragraph 4.3.4 explains in relation ton Draft Policy GD2 that "Delivering housing to meet identified need across the District is a vital element of the Local Plan and Policy H1 sets out target figures for the most sustainable settlements in line with Policy SS1. These target figures are linked to ensuring that the District's housing requirements are met and most development is directed to the most sustainable settlements in line with Policy SS1. These target figures are linked to ensuring that the District's housing requirements are met and most development is directed to the most sustainable locations in the District. Policy GD2 supports the aims of the spatial strategy by ensuring that the settlement housing targets set out in Policy H1 are followed. While the term 'significantly exceed' in criterion a should be interpreted by the decision-maker in the context of local circumstances, as a rule of thumb the target should not normally be exceeded by more than about 10%."

Policy H1 is silent about the provision of housing at Broughton Astley.