Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
Search representations
Results for Cotesbach Parish Council search
New searchObject
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
L1 clause 3
Representation ID: 6350
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Low carbon design techniques and technologies are not sufficiently being committed to in Policy L1
Low carbon design techniques and technologies are not sufficiently being committed to in Policy L1
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
Key issue 7: Town centres and retail
Representation ID: 6351
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Not positively prepared and Not justified - Policy L1 or RT1 have not committed to improving Lutterworth town centre retail opportunities. Resources have not been invested into committing retail allocation in Lutterworth, or identifying S016 or other monies to support an enhancement of the town centre.
Not positively prepared and Not justified - Policy L1 or RT1 have not committed to improving Lutterworth town centre retail opportunities. Resources have not been invested into committing retail allocation in Lutterworth, or identifying S016 or other monies to support an enhancement of the town centre.
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
4.3 GD2 Explanation
Representation ID: 6353
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Regarding paragraph 4.3.3, the Lutterworth SDA cannot be considered a sustainable development and meeting NPPF guidelines. There is not evidence to highlight the risk of splitting Lutterworth into two through the M1 causing a divided community, therefore the Policy L1 is not congruent with NPPF. Focus needs to be on improvement of the town centre to demonstrate that the vitality of rural communities can be enabled. The Sustainability Assessment 2015 highlights the significant distance from rail infrastructure.
Regarding paragraph 4.3.3, the Lutterworth SDA cannot be considered a sustainable development and meeting NPPF guidelines. There is not evidence to highlight the risk of splitting Lutterworth into two through the M1 causing a divided community, therefore the Policy L1 is not congruent with NPPF. Focus needs to be on improvement of the town centre to demonstrate that the vitality of rural communities can be enabled. The Sustainability Assessment 2015 highlights the significant distance from rail infrastructure.
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
H6 3a.
Representation ID: 6354
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Not Justified - better consideration needs to be given to the access of the Moorbarns Lane site with it being so close to the school and residential area
A site appears to already have been identified without planning permission granted or material considerations given
Not Justified - better consideration needs to be given to the access of the Moorbarns Lane site with it being so close to the school and residential area
A site appears to already have been identified without planning permission granted or material considerations given
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
BE1 1b.i. 10 hectares B1 & B2 uses in Lutterworth East SDA
Representation ID: 6355
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Not positively prepared as the Local Plan itself (para 6.1.9) recognises allocation of BE1 above the suggested HEDNA figure, it recognises the land as Grade 2 high agricultural quality (para 15.2.11 in LE1) and was previously consulted upon as a Motorway Service Station, but now there is no requirement for this due to an active planning application less than 4 miles away. This reinforces the lack of required need.
Not positively prepared as the Local Plan itself (para 6.1.9) recognises allocation of BE1 above the suggested HEDNA figure, it recognises the land as Grade 2 high agricultural quality (para 15.2.11 in LE1) and was previously consulted upon as a Motorway Service Station, but now there is no requirement for this due to an active planning application less than 4 miles away. This reinforces the lack of required need.
Support
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
BE2 2e.
Representation ID: 6356
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Fundamental infrastructure problems along the A5, A426, Gibbets Roundabout, Whittle Roundabout and other junctions exist. The current applications that Policy BE2 is clearly based upon do not properly address this policy BE2 (1)e.
Fundamental infrastructure problems along the A5, A426, Gibbets Roundabout, Whittle Roundabout and other junctions exist. The current applications that Policy BE2 is clearly based upon do not properly address this policy BE2 (1)e.
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
BE2 2a.
Representation ID: 6358
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
There is no evidence of the process that the call for sites has lead to the figures outlined here and in the suggested location. It has not been a transparent process since the consultation in 2015 and the location and allocation is clearly based on 2 existing applications that are due for decision before this Local Plan will be approved.
There is no evidence of the process that the call for sites has lead to the figures outlined here and in the suggested location. It has not been a transparent process since the consultation in 2015 and the location and allocation is clearly based on 2 existing applications that are due for decision before this Local Plan will be approved.
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
L1 clause 2
Representation ID: 6359
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
Not positively prepared as this policy has not considered how the potential benefits of the SDA could be used to enhance Lutterworth Town, for example specific allocations or Retail land.
Not positively prepared as this policy has not considered how the potential benefits of the SDA could be used to enhance Lutterworth Town, for example specific allocations or Retail land.
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
L1 3m.
Representation ID: 6360
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
The "spine road" needs to be fit for purpose, i.e enable Town Centre traffic reduction, and be committed to earlier than 1,250 dwellings - this will be almost when the development is complete and traffic levels are too high.
The "spine road" needs to be fit for purpose, i.e enable Town Centre traffic reduction, and be committed to earlier than 1,250 dwellings - this will be almost when the development is complete and traffic levels are too high.
Object
Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031, Proposed Submission
L1 3q.
Representation ID: 6361
Received: 02/11/2017
Respondent: Cotesbach Parish Council
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? No
This needs to include a regular bus service to local train stations as currently Lutterworth is highly dependent on the road network. The 2015 Sustainability Assessment recognised a risk with the Lutterworth SDA being so far from a train station, but this has not been addressed within the Local Plan.
This needs to include a regular bus service to local train stations as currently Lutterworth is highly dependent on the road network. The 2015 Sustainability Assessment recognised a risk with the Lutterworth SDA being so far from a train station, but this has not been addressed within the Local Plan.
