Regulation 18 draft Local Plan

Support

Representation ID: 5586

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Strutt & Parker (on behalf of Exton Estate)

Agent: Strutt & Parker

RCC should allocate the most suitable of the reserve sites within the larger settlements that have been identified in the LPPO, including Land North of Mill Lane, Cottesmore (Reserve Site H1.a), which is a suitable development site in the most sustainable larger village settlement, as reflected in RCC’s proposal to reserve the site for future development.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 5590

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Strutt & Parker (on behalf of Exton Estate)

Agent: Strutt & Parker

We support the inclusion of industrial and brownfield land including disused railheads within the spatial strategy of waste management.

Noted.

Object

Representation ID: 5591

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Strutt & Parker (on behalf of Exton Estate)

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Alternative sites for waste management inert waste and recycling should be included within the policy to ensure a robust and flexible planning policy. To this end we would advocate the inclusion of land south of Cottesmore known as Cottesmore Sidings is within the policy wording.

A site assessment was undertaken for Cottesmore Sidings however it was not taken forward as an allocation in the Local Plan due to a lack of information submitted for the site with regards to proposed waste management methods, size of the site or potential throughputs. If the site was to operate in such a way as to contribute to the recycling of waste, the emerging policies would support the site coming forward via the development management process

Support

Representation ID: 5593

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Strutt & Parker (on behalf of Exton Estate)

Agent: Strutt & Parker

As a defined Larger Village we support this scale of development within PLD of Exton.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 5595

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Strutt & Parker (on behalf of Exton Estate)

Agent: Strutt & Parker

As a defined Larger Village we support then principle of development in the order of this scale within PLD of Exton.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 5598

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Strutt & Parker (on behalf of Exton Estate)

Agent: Strutt & Parker

Whilst we support the allocation of this site as a reserve for housing, to ensure a better spatial strategy of housing development within the Larger Villages we would advocate inclusion of this land within the sites proposed for residential development.

Support noted.

Support

Representation ID: 5617

Received: 05/01/2024

Respondent: Strutt & Parker (on behalf of Exton Estate)

Agent: Strutt & Parker

We are supportive of the presumption in favour of solar and renewable energy developments. However the policy needs to be reflective of the impact electricity grid connection capacity constraints (a necessary upgrade works) have on the size and location of areas identified for solar development. The policy must not eliminate development in other areas which may be suitable and satisfy the key policy tests. For areas identified as ground mounted solar potential there should be flexibility in the size of the areas provided they satisfy the criteria of other policies of the plan.

Support noted. The wording of CC8 would not preclude support for ground mounted solar projects that lie outside the opportunity area designation on the Proposals Map. Para 005 in PPG on Renewable and Low Carbon Energy states, however, that: Identifying areas suitable for renewable energy in plans gives greater certainty as to where such development will be permitted. For example, where councils have identified suitable areas for large scale solar farms they should not have to give permission outside those areas for speculative applications involving the same type of development when they judge the impact to be unacceptable.