Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Search Representations

Results for Gladman Developments search

New search New search

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Affordable Housing

Representation ID: 6533

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

It is noted that the Council's proposed affordable housing targets are 40% for the West Sub Area and 30% for the North, South and East Sub Areas. Any such requirement should be based on up to-date evidence of whole plan viability that has been undertaken in line with the requirements of paragraphs 173 and 174 of the Framework. Pursuing sustainable development requires careful attention to viability and costs in plan-making and it is therefore vital that these issues are considered when developing an appropriate strategy for development within a local plan.

Full text:

See attachment for full submission.

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Relationship with other Local Plans and the Duty to Co-operate

Representation ID: 6536

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

It is noted that NEDDC is currently in the process of updating its evidence base on a number of matters, including objectively assessed housing needs. It is important that this exercise is undertaken through a process of pro-active engagement with relevant neighbouring authorities, including those within the north Derbyshire / North Nottinghamshire HMA and the SCR. Suitably robust evidence will need to be published alongside the Local Plan in due course to demonstrate that the duty to cooperate is being
fulfilled.

Full text:

See attachment for full submission.

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Policy SS2: Scale of Development

Representation ID: 6539

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

The Council's proposed housing requirement is based on evidence prepared in 2013/14, statement that an update is needed so LP is identifying sufficient land to meet development needs.

Noted that the proposed annual housing requirement of 300 dwellings per annum over the plan period does not represent the upper end of the OAN range identified within the Council's own evidence base.

Gladman welcomes update to housing target based on updated evidence and further work with strategic partners. Would welcome opportunity to be involved in any consultation exercises relating to preparation of new evidence base document.

Full text:

See attachment for full submission.

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Policy SS3 : Spatial Strategy and the Distribution of Development

Representation ID: 6543

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

Noted that policy makes reference to the minimum requirement that is set out in Policy SS2. Evidence required to demonstrate that allocations have the ability to meet full, objectively assessed housing needs over the plan period.

Suggestion that an appropriate buffer is added to the 6,600 target as contingency, in order to ensure that the LP is sufficiently flexible and can respond to the rapid changes in circumstance

Suggestion that Council recalculate its proposed 'broad distribution' to ensure that a 20% contingency is built into its local plan.

SS3 includes a proposed settlement hierarchy. Request that all sustainable settlements, such as Grassmoor, are apportioned an additional level of growth.

Full text:

See attachment for full submission.

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

North East Derbyshire Green Belt

Representation ID: 6546

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

Gladman consider that locations outside of green belt in suitable, available, viable and sustainable locations should be allocated for development within the Plan.

Gladman do not object to the release of Green Belt that no longer meets the purposes set out in the Framework. However, all reasonable non Green Belt options should first have been carefully explored.

Full text:

See attachment for full submission.

Object

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Policy SS11: Local Settlement Gaps

Representation ID: 6549

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

Statement that new development can often be located in countryside gaps without leading to the physical or visual merging of settlements, eroding the sense of separation between them or resulting in the loss of openness and character. Questions over the purpose of settlement gap designation. Objection to the use of settlement gaps if these would only serve to act as a tool to prevent development in otherwise sustainable locations.

Acknowledgement of need to maintain settlement identity, request that associated policies are carefully considered and drafted in a manner that is suitably permissive to not unnecessarily restrict development opportunities.

Policy S11 considered by Gladman to be overly restrictive.

Full text:

See attachment for full submission.

Object

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Policy SS12: Development on Unallocated Land within Settlements with defined Settlement Development Limits

Representation ID: 6600

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

Objection to the use settlement limits if the approach would preclude otherwise
sustainable development from coming forward. Policy seen as overly restrictive.

Development proposals that are adjacent to sustainable settlements should be considered favourably by the Council in circumstances where there is a clear and demonstrable need for growth. Such proposals could then be considered against relevant policy-led criteria.

Flexibility is required within the Plan, an overly restrictive approach could result in a plan that is not positively
prepared or effective.

Full text:

See attachment.

Object

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Policy SS13: Development in Small Villages & Hamlets

Representation ID: 6601

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

Objection to the use settlement limits if the approach would preclude otherwise
sustainable development from coming forward. Policy seen as overly restrictive.

Development proposals that are adjacent to sustainable settlements should be considered favourably by the Council in circumstances where there is a clear and demonstrable need for growth. Such proposals could then be considered against relevant policy-led criteria.

Flexibility is required within the Plan, an overly restrictive approach could result in a plan that is not positively
prepared or effective.

Full text:

See attachment.

Object

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Policy SS14: Development in the Countryside

Representation ID: 6602

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

Objection to the use of settlement limits if the approach would preclude otherwise
sustainable development from coming forward. Policy seen as overly restrictive. Policy SS14 appears to be more akin to policies prepared prior to the publication of the NPPF.

Development proposals that are adjacent to sustainable settlements should be considered favourably by the Council in circumstances where there is a clear and demonstrable need for growth. Such proposals could then be considered against relevant policy-led criteria.

Flexibility is required within the Plan, an overly restrictive approach could result in a plan that is not positively
prepared or effective.

Full text:

See attachment.

Comment

Consultation Draft (February 2017)

Policy LC1: Housing Allocations

Representation ID: 6603

Received: 07/04/2017

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Representation Summary:

No specific comments to make on the individual merits of the proposed
housing allocations at this stage.

Is vital that the Council publishes sufficient information within its housing trajectory to demonstrate how the proposed suite of allocations will maintain a rolling five year housing land supply whilst meeting OAN.

Gladman consider that it is necessary for NEDDC to increase the number of sites that are proposed for allocation within the emerging LP. As a result, further allocations should be directed to sustainable locations such as Land at Hagg Hill, Grassmoor.

Full text:

See attachment.

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.