Regulation 19 - Proposed Draft Local Plan Submission

Support

Representation ID: 13687

Received: 06/05/2025

Respondent: Trustees of the Crane Estate and Mrs Jean Williams

Agent: Twenty5

The Crane Estate do not support DM06 as currently proposed. Further clarity is requested and it is considered that amendments to the wording of Part 1c and Parts 2c, 2d, 2e, and 2f. are required to ensure the policy is justified and sound.

Support

Representation ID: 13688

Received: 06/05/2025

Respondent: Trustees of the Crane Estate and Mrs Jean Williams

Agent: Twenty5

The Crane Estates note the need for a Sequential Test where necessary and have no further comments to raise at this moment in time.

Object

Representation ID: 13689

Received: 06/05/2025

Respondent: Trustees of the Crane Estate and Mrs Jean Williams

Agent: Twenty5

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Not supported, and has not been positively prepared, is not justified or based on sound evidence, as per paragraph 36 of the NPPF.
Part 1 and 2a, approach is vague and fails to provide further details in relation to rainwater storage.
Part 3f wording needs to be more specific in terms of return periods for the 20% reduction in run-off, and how the rate should be applied and what should be achieved. Also practical implications associated with 20% runoff rate.
It is unclear whether brownfield sites would need to revert to greenfield and if a further 20% would then need to be applied, which would be seemingly onerous.

Object

Representation ID: 13690

Received: 06/05/2025

Respondent: Trustees of the Crane Estate and Mrs Jean Williams

Agent: Twenty5

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

DM09 wording includes no flexibility and fails to have regard to viability and individual development proposals. It is not considered reasonable to restrict the delivery of residential development when the BRE Home Quality Mark certification is a voluntary certification and exceeds Building Regulations. The Councils approach is onerous and not supported by evidence.

Object

Representation ID: 13691

Received: 06/05/2025

Respondent: Trustees of the Crane Estate and Mrs Jean Williams

Agent: Twenty5

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

The Crane Estate support the principle of the policy and securing a mandatory requirement of 10% BNG. However, ss currently worded does not provide any flexibility and sets an absolute requirement. Request that flexibility is built into the policy to allow developments to be delivered even when they cannot meet all of the requirements set out in draft Policy DM10.

Support

Representation ID: 13692

Received: 06/05/2025

Respondent: Trustees of the Crane Estate and Mrs Jean Williams

Agent: Twenty5

The Crane Estate broadly support the wording of the policy and the support to proposals that enhance the quality of existing community and education facilities.

Support

Representation ID: 13694

Received: 06/05/2025

Respondent: Trustees of the Crane Estate and Mrs Jean Williams

Agent: Twenty5

Policies map: Land South of Dunton Road, Broughton Astley is not subject to any formal designations. The Crane Estate consider it necessary for the Council to allocate additional sites within the District for housing, with the Site representing an unconstrained and deliverable option in a sustainable location. We ask this Site is considered to meet the District’s and Broughton Astley’s housing needs.