Regulation 19 - Proposed Draft Local Plan Submission

In addition to providing greater clarity on the type and amount of floorspace proposed, we also consider that several changes are required to the policy criteria to ensure that the policy is accurate and therefore deliverable and effective against the tests of soundness. We have set out proposed amendments to the policy wording and an explanation of why these changes are required below.

- Site Name: Land to the ‘west’ of Priory Business Park is no longer part of the allocation as it has been developed as Beauchamp Business Park. We recommend that the site name is changed to 'Land south of Priory Business Park'.

- Criteria 1: As explained above this should be changed to: "Site is allocated for a mix of business and light industrial floorspace (Use Classes E(g) and B2) and a minimum of 580 sqm retail floorspace (Use Classes E(a) and E(b).'

- Criteria 2: The reference to Wistow Road is a hangover from the adopted allocation for the wider site and should be deleted. Access into the Site is from Warwick Road only. The policy criteria should read: '2. Development will be accessed, including by sustainable modes, from Warwick Road'.

- Criteria 3: The reference to extending the footway on the south side of Wistow Road is a hangover from the adopted allocation for the wider site and should be deleted. This footway has already been provided to serve Beauchamp Business Park.

- Criteria 4: The requirement for noise attenuation and landscaping along the railway line is copied from the current allocation for the wider site. The Site does not adjoin the railway line and the criteria should be updated accordingly. The policy criteria should read: '4. Development will include adequate and appropriate landscaping to screen and protect the residential amenity of existing properties on 'Kibworth Meadows.'

On behalf of our client, Manor Oak Homes, we are pleased to make representations to the current Regulation 19 draft Local Plan consultation. These representations focus on the proposed allocation at Policy SA01 (Site Ref: K2) of our client’s site at Land South of Priory Business Park (‘the Site’) for business, light industrial and retail development. We also provide comments on Policy DS02 and Policy AP02 with respect to how they relate to the proposed site allocations.

We provide a brief description of the Site, its planning history and adopted planning policy below, before setting out our client’s representations, including the changes that we consider are required to make the Local Plan sound.

Site Description
The Site comprises 3.02 hectares (ha) of agricultural land to the south of Priory Business Park and Wistow Road, to the west of Warwick Road and to the east of the recently constructed Beauchamp Business Park, Kibworth.

Planning History
The Site previously had outline planning permission (ref: 16/00286/OUT) for a mixture of commercial/industrial (up to 11,368sqm), office (up to 882sqm) and retail use (up to 294sqm) alongside the land now developed as Beauchamp Business Park. This permission has now lapsed and Beauchamp Business Park to the west is being developed under a separate planning permission (ref: 19/02005/FUL) that will deliver 8,891sqm commercial/industrial floorspace.

A pre-application advice request was submitted in 2021 relating to proposals for c.3,300 sqm of commercial/industrial/office floorspace and a c.2,200 sqm retail food store on the Site. At this stage officers advised that the Site was suitable for a retail food store under adopted planning policy, subject to also delivering employment floorspace, but that the scale of retail floorspace proposed would need to be justified and pass the required retail impact and sequential assessments.

Adopted Development Plan
The Harborough Local Plan 2011-2031 (HLP) was adopted in April 2019 and the Kibworths Neighbourhood Plan Review (KNP) was made on 31 May 2023. HLP Policy K1 allocates the Site and land now comprising Beauchamp Business Park to the west of the Site for a mix of business, light industrial and retail development. The supporting text refers to the allocation being delivered in general accordance with the floorspace figures in the then extant planning permission (i.e. ref: 16/00286/OUT). The KNP identifies the Site as located within the Limits to Development at Policy SD1 where development is supported in principle.

Emerging Policies Map
The emerging Policies Map shows that the Site is proposed to be allocated by Policy SA01 (Site Ref: K2) and the majority of the Site (excluding land along the frontage with Warwick Road) is also proposed to be designated as a Key Employment Area.

Representations

Policy SA01 Site Allocations (Site Ref: K2 – Land south and west of Priory Business Park)

The Site is proposed to be allocated for a mix of business, light industrial and retail development (Use Classes E(g), B2 and E(a)) by emerging Policy SA01 (Site Ref: K2), but unlike the adopted site allocation policy for the Site, neither the emerging policy nor its supporting text set a quantum of floor space for each Use Class.

Manor Oak Homes (MOH) supports the proposed allocation of the Site, but considers that the policy would benefit from greater clarity regarding the type and amount of floorspace proposed, particularly with respect to retail uses. This will ensure that the policy provides the necessary certainty to be considered deliverable and effective as per the tests of soundness. The Council’s evidence base should be used to inform the proposed uses on the site.

The Council’s retail evidence is set out in the Harborough Retail Town Centres Study (Lichfields, Feb 2025). This identifies a forecast need in Kibworth for 580 sqm gross retail floorspace during the emerging plan period which can be approximately split into 150 sqm convenience floorspace, 70 sqm comparison goods and 360 sqm food / beverage use (Table 7.3). The reports sets out that this need is being led by population growth, but that unlike other centres, Kibworth has a very low vacancy rate and no forecast capacity to accommodate the additional need. It therefore recommends that new local shops/services are included in large housing allocations, including making specific reference to the proposed allocation at Policy SA01 (Site Ref: K1) for 475 dwellings at Land West of Warwick Road, Kibworth (also within the control of Manor Oak Homes). It should be noted that no retail uses are proposed as part of the allocation for Land West of Warwick Road, but that this site and Land South of Priory Business Park were promoted together to ensure retail uses are delivered to serve new and existing residents.

The Council’s employment needs evidence is set out in the Harborough Local Housing & Employment Land Evidence (Iceni, Feb 2025). This report concludes that there is a good existing and committed supply of employment land in the district overall and in Kibworth. Overall, a modest surplus across all employment uses is forecast, but the analysis identifies a modest shortfall of industrial land. The Site is identified as part of the committed supply of employment land, but the report notes that given the existing delivery at Beauchamp Business Park, its delivery is subject to market demand.

In the above context and given the recent and planned housing growth to the west of Kibworth, we consider that there is a strong case for retail provision on the Site to cater for the needs of local residents. From previous pre-application discussions with officers, we are aware that the Council are keen to ensure that a mix of employment and retail uses are delivered on the Site. As set out in our call for sites submission we can confirm that the 3.02 ha site has the capacity to deliver significant employment floorspace (c. 3,000 sqm) in addition to providing approximately 2,000sqm of retail floorspace. At this stage we appreciate that the identified need for retail floorspace in Kibworth during the plan period is 580sqm, but this position may change with further residential development in the local area and a minimum figure is therefore recommended in the policy. The identified need is also for a mixture of retail uses including shops (Use Class E(a)) and food and beverage (Use Class E(b)). In this context, MOH propose the following uses on the Site:

• Business and light industrial floorspace (Use Class E(g) and B2); and
• A minimum of 580sqm retail floorspace (Use Class E(a) and E(b).

We trust that these representations will be given due consideration in the examination of the Local Plan and we look forward to participating further once the examination commences.

In order for the Local Plan to provide the necessary certainty with respect to site allocations, as per tests of soundness, we recommend that an additional criteria d) is added to Policy DS02 to read: 'd) it otherwise accords with site allocation Policy SA01.'

Site K2 (Land south and west of Priory Business Park) is proposed to be designated as a Key Employment Area (KEA) by Policy DS02. This policy states that development will only be permitted in the KEAs where it is for employment uses (i.e. Use Classes E(g), B2 and B8) or it is for other small-scale uses that provide services to support the employment area. We are concerned that this policy adds to the lack of clarity regarding the allocation of retail uses at K2 (see representations to Policy SA01 Site Ref K2).

We consider that this matter can be positively resolved by setting out more clearly at Policy SA01 (Site Ref: K2) the type and amount of retail floorspace allocated to the Site (see separate representations to this policy). This change would enable the proposed provision to be tested through the Local Plan process and would negate the need for further retail impact and sequential testing at application stage. As such, alongside the proposed changes to Policy SA01 (Site Ref: K2) we consider that Policy AP02 should be amended so that these requirements do not apply to proposals that accord with site allocation policies, as follows:

'3. A Retail Impact Assessment will be required for retail and leisure development, except for proposals that are in accordance with site allocation Policy SA01, including extensions of:
a. 500 square metres (gross) or more in Market Harborough and Lutterworth, or any lower threshold defined in a Neighbourhood Plan elsewhere.
4. A sequential test applies to development for all main town centre uses which are not located within a defined centre, except for proposals that are in accordance with site allocation Policy SA01.'

The above change would also ensure that the policy complies with NPPF paragraph 91 which only requires a sequential test outside of existing centres if not in accordance with an up-to-date plan.

Policy AP02 sets out requirements for Retail Impact Assessments (RIA) and for a sequential test for all main town centre uses located outside of defined centres. We support the need for these tests in principle, but are concerned that they would apply to the allocated retail uses at Site Ref: K2. This would add uncertainty to the deliverability of the proposed allocation.

To ensure that the policy is sound, it should be amended as follows:

- No. Homes: Increase to 40 dwellings.
- Delete criteria 2 regarding Croft Pastures SSSI.

Manor Oak Homes controls the proposed allocation site and is pleased to confirm that it remains deliverable for the proposed development. Manor Oak Homes supports the proposed allocation of the site and is pleased to confirm the site’s suitability and deliverability for residential development as set out below. The only concerns raised with respect to the soundness of the policy concern the scale of development proposed and the lack of justification for the policy criteria concerning Croft Pastures SSSI.

The site is assessed in the 2024 SHELAA Update (Ref: 24/10649) as developable with a capacity for 43 dwellings on a developable area of 1.44ha (or 62.5% of the 2.31ha site area) at 30 dph. This assessment accords with the proposal for approximately 44 dwellings put forward in the Call for Sites that was supported by a Design Concept Document demonstrating the suitability of the site for this number of homes.

There is no explicit explanation at Policy SA01 for the reduction in the proposed quantum of development to 30 dwellings, but the Sustainability Appraisal at Appendix E states the following:

“The site is considered to meet the criteria for potential site allocation and is in line with the Local Plan objectives and spatial strategy. The site is well related to the existing built form and, providing that there is no built development on the eastern third of the site (due to surface water issues and encroachment into open countryside), the site is considered an appropriate location for development to contribute to the delivery of the housing growth identified for Ullesthorpe.”

Based on the above assessment, we assume that the quantum of development has been reduced due to the requirement to avoid built development on the eastern third of the site. We support the proposed approach to focus development on the western two-thirds of the site, but disagree that this necessitates such a large reduction in the number of dwellings. We are pleased to confirm that site can deliver approximately 40 dwellings whilst complying with the proposed policy criteria and all other technical considerations as set out below.

Proposed Development
Following a review of the Council’s evidence base and the proposed site allocation policy, Manor Oak Homes has reviewed their proposals for the site. We are pleased to enclose an updated Concept Masterplan (Enclosure 1) that achieves approximately 40 dwellings whilst fully complying with the site allocation criteria and all other technical and policy considerations. It comprises:

- Approximately 40 dwellings: Depending on the final mix of dwelling sizes and types, the proposals may be for a slightly lower or higher number and would deliver affordable housing in accordance with policy requirements.

- Developable Area: The area for built development is shown as approximately 1.3ha, giving a density of just over 30 dph in accordance with emerging Policy HN03. The built area is restricted to the western two thirds of the site.

- Public Open Space (POS): The eastern approximately one third of the site is reserved for POS including a 200 sqm Local Area for Play (LAP), footpath routes and structural landscaping.

- Sustainable Drainage System (SuDS): A SuDS drainage basin is shown within the southern part of the site adjoining the POS. The size and location of this basin has been designed by the project’s engineers, Martin Andrews Consulting, to ensure that it complies with all relevant standards.

- Surface Water Flood Risk: In accordance with the site allocation we can confirm that the proposed built form is located outside of the area at risk of surface water flooding and that the proposed development is safe and suitable in this regard.

- Landscape: The Concept Masterplan shows structural landscaping that is integrated into the design of the proposal including proposed buffer planting to the southern boundary and locating the development on the western part of the site with landscaped open space to the east. The proposed design has been informed by advice from the project’s landscape architects, Aspect Landscape, and demonstrates how the proposed development would mitigate impacts on the wider landscape, including views from Lutterworth Road to the south in accordance with the site allocation policy.

- Ecology:

o Croft Pastures SSSI: Potential impact on this designated site is referred to in the site allocation criteria despite it being located approximately 8km north of the site and therefore outside the 5km impact risk zone identified by Natural England. There is no explanation or justification for this policy criteria provided in the Local Plan and the only relevant reference to Croft Pasture SSSI that we have been able to find in the evidence base is in the Joint Water Cycle Scoping Study (JBA Consulting, December 2024). This study lists Croft Pasture SSSI in Table 13.3 which lists SSSIs that have been screened into the assessment because they are downstream of a Waste Water Treatment Works (WWTW) in the study area. It must be assumed from this that the proposed policy criteria refers to the potential impact of increased foul water flows within the catchment of the SSSI (i.e. by increased nutrients in the watercourse). At no point does the Joint Water Cycle Scoping Study identify that the SSSI is already impacted by increased nutrient levels (or even that it would be affected if nutrient levels were to increase), nor is the SSSI listed as an area affected by Nutrient Neutrality. In this context there is no justification for this criteria and it should be deleted.

o On-site Ecology and BNG: The design of the proposals has been informed by detailed ecological and arboricultural advice and we can confirm that existing trees and hedgerows will be protected and that ecological enhancements are proposed throughout the public open space. Biodiversity Net Gain is considered to be deliverable on-site or if required utilising land controlled by Manor Oak Homes located to the east of the site.

- Access: The proposed access into the site has been designed by the project’s engineers and we can confirm that it would meet all relevant standards to be considered safe and suitable for the proposed quantum of development.

The site is sustainably located adjoining the existing built up area of Ullesthorpe and is suitable for the proposed use in all respects. Manor Oak Homes supports the proposed allocation of the site and is pleased to confirm its deliverability for residential development. The only concerns raised with respect to the soundness of the policy concern the scale of development and the lack of justification for the policy criteria concerning Croft Pastures SSSI.

The Concept Masterplan submitted with these representations demonstrates that approximately 40 dwellings can be delivered on the site whilst complying with the policy criteria for built development to be focussed on the western two thirds of the site area. In this context there is no justification for the proposed reduction in the number of dwellings from the quantum assessed as suitable in the SHELAA. The proposed reduction is also not consistent with national policy at NPPF (December 2023) paragraphs 123 and 128 to 130 which set out the importance of making efficient use of land. In order to be considered sound we therefore propose that the allocation is increased to approximately 40 dwellings.

There is no justification provided in the Local Plan or its evidence base for the proposed policy criteria concerning Croft Pastures SSSI and it is therefore unsound and should be deleted.

Manor Oak Homes considers that Harborough District Council has complied with the Duty to Cooperate during the preparation of the Proposed Submission Draft Harborough Local Plan. It is clear from the Duty to Cooperate Statement of Compliance (January 2025) that the Council has co-operated with the relevant prescribed bodies in accordance with Section 33A of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004. A key element of this cooperation has been the agreement to meet Leicester’s unmet housing need alongside other Leicestershire authorities.

Section 33A requires engagement under the Duty to Cooperate to be ongoing. We consider that this has been demonstrated so far, but this requirement does not stop at Regulation 19 publication stage and must continue. This is particularly relevant with respect to the ongoing examination of the Leicester Local Plan 2020-2036. It is our understanding that during the examination Leicester City Council (LCC) has acknowledged that their plan will not cover the expected 15 year period for strategic policies from adoption. LCC are proposing to address this issue by committing in a new policy to undertake an immediate review of the Local Plan. The Inspectors’ Post Hearing Letter (Ref: EXAM 113) confirms their support for this approach as “the work required to revisit local housing and employment land needs for an extended Plan period would have serious consequences for the progress of plan making and development both in Leicester and the surrounding boroughs and districts.” There is a recognition here that it is important to preserve the agreements reached with respect to sharing Leicester’s unmet need, but that there is an ongoing requirement to co-operate on meeting Leicester’s likely unmet need post-2036. This has important implications for the examination of Harborough’s Local Plan which covers the period to 2041, but only seeks to meet a proportion of Leicester’s unmet need up to 2036 (i.e. the period for which there is data available on the extent of Leicester’s unmet need). In this respect, as set out in our representations to Policy IM01 we consider that a commitment is required to immediately review the Local Plan in line with Leicester City Council’s commitment.

No modification required with respect to this paragraph, but please see representation to Policy IM01 concerning the need for a commitment to an immediate review of the Local Plan.

The policy should be amended as follows:

'1. The housing requirement for Harborough District is 14,106 between 2020 and 2041. The annual housing requirement is 701 homes per year between 2020 and 2036, and 578 homes per year between 2036 and 2041.'

Part 2 of the policy will also need to be updated to reflect the need for new housing allocations to meet the above increase in the housing requirement and the expected shortfall in forecast delivery from the new strategic scale allocations.

Housing Requirement:

The Local Plan was published for Regulation 19 consultation ahead of the 12th March 2025 deadline set by paragraph 234 of the NPPF (December, 2024). It therefore qualifies for the transitional arrangements to be examined under the previous version of the NPPF (December 2023) as long as its draft housing requirement meets at least 80% of Local Housing Need (LHN) calculated using new standard method. The new standard method figure for Harborough is 723 dpa, 80% of which is 578 dpa. The proposed housing requirement of 657 dpa is comfortably above this figure and the Local Plan therefore meets the transitional arrangements.

We are, however, concerned that the only reason that the Local Plan qualifies for the transitionary arrangements is that the housing requirement incorporates a 123 dpa uplift to accommodate an agreed proportion of Leicester’s unmet need. We do not consider the plan to be positively prepared in this regard as it does not provide a strategy which as a minimum seeks to meet the area’s objectively assessed need (which in the context of the transitional arrangements must be at least 80% of LHN) and accommodate unmet need from neighbouring areas. We therefore consider that the housing requirement fails the tests of soundness and should be increased to 578 dpa (i.e. 80% of LHN), plus a 123 dpa uplift for Leicester’s unmet need, giving an annual requirement of 701 dpa for 2020-2036 and 578 dpa for 2036-2041 (i.e. the period when there is no data currently available on the extent of Leicester’s unmet). This would increase the Local Plan housing requirement by 924 dwellings from 13,182 to 14,106 new homes during the plan period. This demonstrates that there is a need for additional site allocations.

Housing Allocations

Manor Oak Homes does not raise any specific objection to the proposed housing allocations, but we are concerned with the reliance on strategic scale allocations at Land South of Gartree Road (Ref: OA1), Scraptoft East (Ref: S1) and North of Market Harborough (Refs: MH1, MH2 and MH3). These sites will take some time to start delivering at scale and will leave a gap in the housing trajectory that risks the Council not be able to demonstrate a 5 year housing land supply (5YHLS) during the early years of the plan period.

This is reflected to some extent already in the Housing Trajectory at Appendix 5 of the Local Plan which shows an average delivery of 865 dpa for the first five years of the plan period (i.e. 2020-2025), but just 561 dpa for the 2025-2030 period. This forecast is already below the annual housing requirement, but we recognise that the Council proposes to apply past over-supply to their 5YHLS calculations which will initially help to demonstrate a 5YHLS. The forecast delivery deficit will, however, become more concerning the longer it takes the new strategic allocations to start delivering at scale. In this respect, the Council’s forecast delivery from these sites is overly optimistic and risks an extended period where the deliverable supply will be lower than the proposed housing requirement.

In the above context, there is a clear need to review the forecast delivery timescales from the strategic site allocations during the Local Plan examination to ensure that they are robust and evidence based. Once this is complete, we expect that there will be a shortfall in the total number of dwellings forecast during the plan period and that the housing trajectory will show completions at a level below the housing requirement for the first 10 years+ post-adoption. This would render the plan unsound as it would not be effective or justified and there would be a clear need for additional site allocations that can deliver during the early years post adoption.

New allocations to be added to the Site Allocations Schedule to ensure a robust supply to meet the housing requirement.

As set out in our representations to Policy DS01, there is a need for new housing allocations to meet the increase in the housing requirement and the expected shortfall in forecast delivery from the new strategic scale allocations.

The allocation of Land at Farndale View, Market Harborough for up to 85 dwellings and strategic green infrastructure provision should be added to the Site Allocations Schedule to ensure a robust supply to meet the housing requirement.

An additional allocation of Land south of Farndale View, Market Harborough (Site Ref: 21/8132) should be included as a housing allocation in the Local Plan for up to 85 dwelling and strategic green infrastructure provision. This would contribute towards addressing the need for additional site allocations to meet the increase in the housing requirement and the expected shortfall in forecast delivery from the new strategic scale allocations (see representations to Policy DS01).

The Site lies on the south-western edge of Market Harborough within Welland Ward. It extends to approximately 12.1 hectares (ha) in size, is irregular in shape and comprises a large arable field in the west and a smaller pastoral field in the east. Residential development is located to the north and the River Welland to the south, east and west.

For ease of reference, we are pleased to re-submit our previous Call for Sites Statement from June 2021 (Enclosure 1) with these representations which includes a detailed description of the proposed development and site assessments covering landscape and visual impact, ecology, access, flood risk and drainage and contaminated land. The Call for Sites Statement also sets out Manor Oak Homes’ proven track record of delivering sites to meet short term housing needs. We have also enclosed an updated Concept Masterplan for the proposed development (Enclosure 2).

In summary, the proposed development is for up to 85 dwellings on a 2.87ha development area at a density of c.30dph and large areas of new public open space on the remainder of the site totalling 9.23ha. This strategic open space provision would be provided on parts of the site that are at fluvial flood risk and would provide significant public benefits with respect to recreation, children’s play and biodiversity net gain.

Following the Call for Sites submission, Manor Oak Homes responded to the SHELAA Technical Consultation in May 2025. In the initial SHELAA assessment that was sent to us for comment, the site was identified as potentially suitable and developable within 6-10 years. Our response (Enclosure 3) confirmed that the site could be delivered in 0-5 years and responded to technical matters raised in the assessment regarding highways access and contaminated land. Additional technical assessments were submitted to demonstrate the suitability of the proposed access and that contaminated land does not present a constraint to development on the site. In our response we requested that the Council revisit their assessment of these matters and seek confirmation from the Highways Authority regarding the proposed site access.

Despite our client’s positive response to the SHELAA Technical Consultation, we are disappointed to see that the assessment of the site in the 2024 SHELAA Update remains almost identical. It is still identified as potentially suitable and developable within 6-10 years and assessed as follows:

“The site is located adjacent to the built-up area of Market Harborough, a sustainable settlement. It is close to key services and facilities. The capacity and impact of the proposed access via Farndale View would need to be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Highway Authority. The southern boundary of the site is at risk of flooding and is categorised as flood zone 3b, 3a and 2. The area within flood zone 3b (red constraint) has been excluded from site area (4.7ha). Submitted evidence indicates that ground conditions could potentially be unstable and may require mitigation. The disused railway line along the northern boundary is a potentially contaminating land use which may require remediation or mitigation. The site is considered potentially suitable.”

In response to the above assessment:

- Highways Access: The assessment states that "The capacity and impact of the proposed access would need to be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Highway Authority". This assessment is identical to that in the initial SHELAA. Our client’s previous submissions demonstrate the suitability of the proposed access and we are unclear why confirmation of this has not been sought from the Highways Authority. This would have confirmed that the site is suitable.

- Flood Risk: The assessment states that: "The southern boundary of the site is at risk of flooding and is categorised as flood zone 3b, 3a and 2. The area within flood zone 3b (red constraint) has been excluded from the site area (4.7ha)". As set out previously, we appreciate that the decision to exclude the area within flood zone 3b from the site may have been made purely for the purposes of assessing the capacity of the site. In this respect we support its omission for the purposes of the SHELAA assessment, but wish to highlight that this area is proposed to form a new parkland area providing greatly enhanced recreational opportunities. We therefore consider that it should still be within the red line boundary of the site in any future allocation; so that the proposed parkland is secured. Based on this assessment, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development in flood risk terms.

- Contaminated Land: The assessment states that "The disused railway line along the northern boundary is a potentially contaminating land use which may require mitigation”. This assessment is almost identical to that provided previously with the words “and would need to be investigated” swapped with “which may require mitigation”. This assessment is entirely based on evidence submitted by Manor Oak Homes which confirms that contaminated land does not present a constraint to development on the site. To confirm this, we have provided an updated desk study on ground conditions (Enclosure 4) which confirms that residential development is not proposed on parts of the site where the former railway line indicates the potential for contaminated land. Based on this assessment, the site is considered suitable for the proposed development with respect to contaminated land.

- Ground Conditions: The assessment states that the “Submitted evidence indicates that ground conditions could potentially be unstable and may require mitigation.” This is the only new part of the SHELAA assessment and is based entirely on evidence submitted by Manor Oak Homes which did not raise this as a suitability issue, but rather a technical matter for consideration during detailed design and construction. The updated desk study on ground conditions (Enclosure 4) confirms that whilst the risk of compressible deposits on-site is considered moderate, it would not prevent the proposed development from coming forward and is simply a matter for consideration in foundation design. It should also be noted that the existing residential development to the north of the site is on the same geology and was constructed with no problems.

As set out above, all technical matters raised have been positively responded to and we therefore consider that the assessment of the site should be updated to ‘suitable for development in 0-5 years’.

There is no obvious reasoning set out in the SHELAA for why the site is not proposed as a potential allocation, given its identification as potentially suitable and developable. The only explanation we have been able to find in this regard is contained at Appendix E of the Sustainability Appraisal (SA) which reads:

“The site would impact on both LWS and heritage and is constrained in terms of flood risk. Site is not considered an appropriate location for development when compared with other locations and sites at Market Harborough.”

This assessment is completely at odds with the SHELAA assessment of the site which does not mention the Local Wildlife Site (LWS) nor any heritage constraints and flood risk is not raised as an issue that would affect the suitability of the site for residential development. Flood risk matters are dealt with above. In response to the comments on the LWS and heritage:

- Local Wildlife Site (LWS): The presence of the River Welland Local Wildlife Site (LWS) along the eastern, western and southern boundary of the site is identified in the ecological assessment submitted with the Call for Sites (Enclosure 1). This identifies suitable mitigation in the form of a 10m buffer from the bank of the River Welland to ensure the LWS is protected and to ensure ecological connectivity is not compromised. It also recommends supplementary planting of the southern boundary with habitats such as wetland grassland mixes and species for vegetation screening of the LWS at the Site. The SA assessment of the site is considered to be incredibly short-sited and it is not clear whether the assessors have reviewed the proposals. If they had they would note that the proposal is to create a >9ha area of landscaped open space along the bank of the river to replace current agricultural uses. This would fully accord with emerging Policy DS03 Development Strategy: Tackling Climate Change and Enhancing the Natural Environment. Policy DS03 supports proposals that contribute to the creation, improved connectivity and enhancement of multifunctional green and blue infrastructure and that contribute to the delivery of the Leicester and Rutland Nature Recovery Strategy (LRNRS). One element of the LRNRS focusses on improving habitats along Welland Valley. Rather than a reason for discounting the site, the clearly positive impacts of the proposal on the River Welland should be a reason for its allocation.

- Heritage: No assessment is provided as to why the proposed development is considered to impact on heritage. The site is not subject to any statutory or non-statutory heritage designations. The closest designated asset is the Grade II Listed Hill House which lies c.180m north of the Site. There is limited intervisibility between the site and Hill House and existing residential development lies between the proposed developable area of the site and Hill House. The Lubenham Conservation Area lies around 930m north-west of the site at its closest. It is therefore difficult to understand how a conclusion of impact on heritage has been reached.

In summary, the site is sustainably located adjoining the built up area of Market Harborough. The proposed development would contribute towards addressing the need for additional site allocations. It would deliver 85 new homes and significant public benefits through the provision of >9ha of new public open space. The site is under the control of Manor Oak Homes which has a proven track record of delivery in the district. It is a logical extension to Market Harborough, would represent a sound allocation and is suitable, available and achievable to contribute towards the need for market and affordable housing identified within the Plan. We therefore request that it is allocated accordingly.

To confirm deliverability of the site, Manor Oak Homes is currently preparing a planning application for the proposed development. This application will be submitted in the near future to fully justify the suitability of the site for the proposed development and why it should be included as an allocation in the Local Plan.

The following modifications are required to provide a sufficiently robust and timely commitment to a review of the Local Plan in line with the Leicester Local Plan review:

“2. A full or partial update of the Local Plan will be commenced (defined as the publication of an invitation to make representations in accordance with Regulation 18 of the Town and County Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012) (or equivalent under any subsequent Regulations) within 6 months of the following:

a) The adoption by the Council of a Statement of Common Ground (SoCG), or equivalent, which proposes a quantity of housing or employment development for the period to 2041 that is [delete the word significantly] greater than the housing requirement or employment need identified and planned for in this Local Plan; or

b) In the absence of an adopted SoCG, or equivalent document, 6 months [replace 12 months with 6 months] from the date of publication of a Local Plan in the Leicester and Leicestershire Housing Market Area (defined as publication of an invitation to make representations in accordance with Regulation 18 [Replace Reg 19 with Reg 18] of the Town and Country (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012) (or equivalent under any subsequent Regulations) that includes satisfactory evidence of an unmet local housing need;”

As set out in our representations to 3.19 Duty to Cooperate, Leicester City Council’s commitment to an immediate review of their Local Plan necessitates the same commitment from Harborough District Council. The Leicester Local Plan will only cover the period to 2036 and as such the emerging Harborough Local Plan is only able to accommodate unmet need from Leicester up until this point. Paragraph 22 of the NPPF (December 2023) requires strategic policies to look ahead over a minimum 15 year period from adoption to anticipate and respond to long-term requirements and opportunities. The Harborough Local Plan is only able to accurately plan for its housing requirement up to 2036 as Leicester has not yet assessed its capacity to meet its housing needs beyond this point. Assuming that the Local Plan is adopted in 2026, this would only represent a 10 year period from adoption and would render the Local Plan inconsistent with National Policy. To resolve this issue, it is imperative that the Local Plan includes a robust requirement for an immediate review in line with the Leicester Local Plan review. We consider that the current review policy fails to provide a sufficiently robust or timely commitment to a review as it would require either an SoCG to be adopted before a review is triggered or for the Leicester Local Plan review to reach Regulation 19 stage. This is clearly insufficient as it would allow significantly delays. We have recommended required modifications below.

As set out above, we consider that the policy is sound as currently drafted and we do not consider that any changes are required to the policy in this regard. There are, however, a few minor changes to the wording of the policy that we consider would make it clearer. These changes could be made as additional modifications to the plan as set out below:

• Site name: The site was promoted alongside Land South of Priory Business Park to the Call for Sites, but the two sites now form separate site allocations (i.e. K1and K2). The Site name should be updated to reflect this:

“Land west of Warwick Road [delete and south of Priory Business Park]”

• Kilby and Foxton Canals SSSI: It is confusing to have two separate criteria the refer to potential impacts on the SSSI. We recommend that these criteria area merged into one.

• Archaeology: As set out above, trial trenching has already been undertaken on the site. We therefore recommend that the policy requirement is updated to read:

“6. Archaeological remains, with potential Roman, medieval, and Saxon remains likely on the site, particularly in the south-east boundary and areas of ridge and furrow. Further Archaeological evaluation, following previous evidence from trial trenching, is likely to be required by condition prior to the commencement of development.”

The proposed allocation of Land West of Warwick Road and South of Priory Business Park, Kibworth is set out in the Policy SA01: Site Allocation Schedule and includes specific policy requirements for the development of the site. Manor Oak Homes controls the proposed allocation site and is pleased to confirm that it remains deliverable for the proposed development. Manor Oak Homes supports the proposed allocation and the policy criteria and we can confirm that we consider the policy to be sound.

Following the publication of the emerging Local Plan, Manor Oak Homes are in the process of reviewing their proposals for the site against the Council’s evidence base and the site allocation policy. A pre-application advice request is currently being prepared for submission to the Council that will include a detailed parameters plan for the proposed development and technical assessments that together confirm that the allocation is deliverable in full accordance with the proposed policy criteria, as follows:

1. Masterplan: Our client supports the requirement to prepare a comprehensive masterplan for the site. The masterplanning process has already commenced with the preparation of a detailed parameters plan for submission with the forthcoming pre-application advice request. The parameters plan will draw on detailed assessments prepared for the previous application and updated technical assessments. As will be demonstrated through the pre-application submission, the site can be delivered for 475 dwellings in full accordance with the site allocation criteria. Following the receipt of pre-application advice, the emerging masterplan will be further refined through a public consultation exercise.

2. Heritage: The potential effects of the proposed development on the setting of nearby heritage assets was assessed in detail as part of the previous planning application for a similar scale of development on the site, including in the officer’s Committee Report (CR). The CR finds that:

“6.69 Due to the distances from the site to nearby conservation areas and listed buildings, together with the sloping nature of the site away from the built form of the settlement and proposed retention of existing boundary treatments, the proposal is not considered to result in harm to the setting of heritage assets.

6.70 The site does not have any intervisibility with either the Kibworth Harcourt or the Kibworth Beauchamp Conservation Areas nor any listed buildings. Further, the site is also seen in the context of existing and committed development to the west of the village […]

6.74 […] the proposed development is not considered to result in harm to the setting of the Grand Union Canal Conservation Area. Further detail of the siting of the proposed development parcels, together with landscaping and building heights, will come forward at reserved matters stage should the application be permitted with the setting of the conservation area considered to be a parameter for the future design and layout of any permitted scheme.”

The design of the proposed development, and in particular the provision of a wide landscape buffer to the north-west of the site where it is closest to the Grand Union Canal, will be retained in the emerging proposals for the site, such that it can be concluded that the proposal would preserve the setting of nearby heritage assets in accordance with the emerging policy criteria.

3. Primary and secondary education expansion: The requirement to contribute to primary and secondary education expansion as necessary is noted. Manor Oak Homes accepts that proportionate contributions will be required and that this will be informed by the consultation response from Leicestershire County Council at planning application stage.

4. Highways: Manor Oak Homes supports the site allocation criteria for suitable highways mitigation to be informed by a Transport Assessment at planning application stage. The project’s highways consultants, SLR, have produced access plans for the site that will be submitted with the pre-application advice request. SLR will also seek pre-application advice from the Local Highways Authority on the scope of the required Transport Assessment to ensure that it adequately assesses the need for off-site and on-site transport measures to mitigate impacts from the development. SLR has confirmed that the safe and suitable access can be provided to the site and that highways considerations to not present a constraint to development on the site.

5. Kilby and Foxton Canal SSSI: The project’s ecologist, Aspect Ecology, has reviewed the proposals with respect to potential impacts on the Kilby and Foxton Canal SSSI and confirmed that due to the distance between the site and the SSSI and the lack of any hydrological connectivity, the proposals are highly unlikely to cause any significant impacts. Further detailed assessment of this matter will be submitted with the forthcoming pre-application advice request.

6. Archaeology: This criterion requires a full archaeological evaluation, including geophysical survey and trial trenching. As set out at paragraph 6.76 of the CR for the previous application, trial trenching has already been undertaken on the site in 2018 with a total of 72 trenches excavated across the site. Manor Oak Homes does not object to a requirement for archaeological evaluation, as it is expected that further archaeological investigation would be required by condition on any grant of planning permission, but for clarity we have recommended minor revisions to the policy wording on this matter.

7. Kilby and Foxton Canal SSSI: This requirement is similar to point 5 but refers to impacts from drainage and the development itself on the SSSI. These points are covered above. For clarity we recommend that criteria 5 and 7 are merged to form a single policy requirement.

8. Flood Risk and Drainage: The projects drainage engineers, MAC, have prepared an indicative drainage strategy and flood risk strategy for the site that is being further refined through the preparation of the pre-application parameters plan and will be submitted to the Lead Local Flood Authority (LLFA) to seek pre-application advice. The indicative strategy demonstrates that a carefully considered and integrated flood resilient and sustainable drainage design can be provided for the proposed development, including a site-specific Surface Water Drainage Strategy, and that a sequential approach to the site layout is proposed.

9. Noise Assessment: Given the proximity of the site to the railway line, Manor Oak Homes supports the site allocation requirement for a noise impact assessment. In order to provide initial confirmation of the suitability of the site with respect to noise levels, we are pleased to confirm that a Noise Appraisal Assessment has been prepared by Professional Consult for submission with the pre-application advice request. This assessment demonstrates that the future noise climate at the Development can be controlled through appropriate noise mitigation measures to meet acceptable noise levels in both internal and external amenity areas which will accord with the ‘No Observed Adverse Effect Level’ as detailed in the PPG and as such noise should not be deemed to be a determining factor in the granting of planning permission for this site. Noise mitigation will include good acoustic design (e.g. gardens facing away from noise sources and acoustic fences where required) and upgraded glazing and alternative ventilation to some elevations. Precise mitigation measures will be set out at detailed design stage.

10. Railway Line Operation: We understand that Network Rail will be a consultee on any planning application on the site and there should therefore be confidence that the development will not adversely impact on operational railway safety. It should be noted that Network Rail raised no objection to the previous application subject to the scheme being developed in line with railway safety guidance. Suitable measures in this regard could be secured by condition on any planning permission.

In summary, Manor Oak Homes controls the proposed allocation site and is pleased to confirm that it remains deliverable for the proposed development. Manor Oak Homes supports the proposed allocation and the policy criteria and we can confirm that we consider the policy to be sound.

The site is sustainably located adjoining the built up area of Kibworth and is suitable for the proposed use in all respects. The technical assessments to support the pre-application submission are at an advanced stage of preparation and will be submitted as part of the pre-application request in due course. At this stage, whilst it is considered premature to share the emerging pre-application submission, we are pleased to confirm that the proposed allocation is deliverable for 475 dwellings in accordance with the emerging policy requirements. The draft allocation is therefore considered sound and the site is suitable and deliverable for the proposed development.

As set out in our representations to Policy DS01, the Local Plan housing trajectory forecasts a shortfall in delivery against the proposed housing requirement during the 2025-2030 period. We consider that this shortfall is underestimated as the housing requirement needs to be increased and the forecast delivery from new strategic scale allocations is overly optimistic. In this context, we consider that there is a need for additional housing allocations, but it is also critical that non-strategic scale housing allocations can deliver as soon as possible. In response to this need, Manor Oak Homes is currently preparing a pre-application advice request for submission to the Council and is committed to working with officers to bring forward a planning application as soon as possible to support the promotion of the site.

Manor Oak Homes has a demonstrable track record of delivering high quality schemes in a timely manner to ensure the benefits of increased housing delivery are felt in the short term. On average, across the sites they have achieved outline consent for where development has commenced, there is a lead in time from achieving consent to development commencing of just 22 months. On this basis, if an outline application is submitted to run concurrently with the emerging Local Plan and approved soon after adoption, we would expect commencement of development less than 2 years after adoption. For a site of this size we would expect it to be built out by a single housebuilder and to be delivered at a rate of 60-70 dwellings per annum. On this basis, we would expect the completion of 200 dwellings within approximately 5 years of the Local Plan’s adoption and the completion of the development within a further 3-4 years. This demonstrates that the site can play an important role in securing housing delivery during the short to medium term following adoption of the Local Plan and that it will help fill the gap left by slower delivery on the strategic scale allocations.

Modifications:
As set out above, we consider that the policy is sound as currently drafted and we do not consider that any changes are required to the policy in this regard. There are, however, a few minor changes to the wording of the policy that we consider would make it clearer. These changes could be made as additional modifications to the plan as set out below:

• Site name: The site was promoted alongside Land South of Priory Business Park to the Call for Sites, but the two sites now form separate site allocations (i.e. K1and K2). The Site name should be updated to reflect this:

“Land west of Warwick Road [delete and south of Priory Business Park]”

• Kilby and Foxton Canals SSSI: It is confusing to have two separate criteria the refer to potential impacts on the SSSI. We recommend that these criteria area merged into one.

• Archaeology: As set out above, trial trenching has already been undertaken on the site. We therefore recommend that the policy requirement is updated to read:

“6. Archaeological remains, with potential Roman, medieval, and Saxon remains likely on the site, particularly in the south-east boundary and areas of ridge and furrow. Further Archaeological evaluation, following previous evidence from trial trenching, is likely to be required by condition prior to the commencement of development.”