Policy D1: Sustainable Design

Showing comments and forms 1 to 14 of 14

Support

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 304

Received: 14/11/2016

Respondent: Sport England - East Region

Representation:

Support for reference to Active Design in Policy D1

Full text:

The reference to Active Design in the supporting text to policy D1 is welcomed and considered justified in view of the importance attached to creating healthy communities in the local plan

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 3807

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Beechwood Homes

Agent: JB Planning Associates

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Object to Policy D1(b)(ii): Implies all proposals will need to incorporate SuDS, ignores practical constraints

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 3825

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: James Property Investments LLP

Agent: JB Planning Associates

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Object to Policy D1(b)(ii): Implies all proposals will need to incorporate SuDS, ignores practical constraints

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 3844

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Pigeon Land Ltd

Agent: Keymer Cavendish Limited

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Object to D1: Too prescriptive, unclear how standards have been arrived at, no consideration of cumulative impacts

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 3902

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Letchworth Garden City Heritage Foundation

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Object on the following grounds:
Design SPD referred to in the policy is outdated and prepared before the NPPF.

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 4096

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: The Crown Estate

Agent: Savills

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Support Policy D1 (para 9.6): Support policy but object to para 9.6 of supporting text, prioritises energy efficiency over other requirements, exceeds national policy

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 5287

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Letchworth Sustainability Forum

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Object to D1:
- Guidance needed in respect of collection of materials from households
- Waste and Recycling provisions
- Climate change
- Current SPD out of date
- Housing standard
- High standard of building controls
- First Garden City and Heritage
- Water collection and storage

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 5290

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Herts WithOut Waste

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

Representation:

Object to D1: Strongly support principles, additional guidance needed on refuse collection.

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 5296

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Hertfordshire County Council - Public Health

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation:

Object D1:
-point c:would recommend that the Hertfordshire Health, Wellbeing and Planning guidance is referenced here;would support emphasis in paragraph9.4
-Health Impact Assessment(HIA) is a process that helps evaluate the potential health effects of a plan, project or policy before it is built or implemented. An HIA can provide recommendations to increase positive health outcomes and minimise adverse health outcomes.
- Whilst other impact assessments such as the SEA, SA and EIA do pick up on health, the definitions within them are often quite narrow and may not consider wider health determinants.

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 5965

Received: 24/11/2016

Respondent: Hitchin Town Action Group (HTAG)

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation:

Support: for the requirements for higher environmental standards generally stated in policy D1

Object:
-developments should be required to have a distinctive 'character' to avoid creation of anonymous environments. Need for proper reference to creating a distinctive sense of place.

-Policy D1(a)5: developments should address the street with a continuous building line and for the creation of active frontages where appropriate.

-Policy D1(a)7 for developments with a mixture of land uses, forms of tenure and built form - policy HS2 and para 5.29 alone will not achieve the economically and socially sustainable developments.

Full text:

See attachment

Attachments:

Support

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 6072

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Anglian Water Services Ltd

Representation:

Support D1: requirement to optimise the potential of Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS), inclusion of optional water efficiency standard (110 litres per person per day).

Full text:


Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the North Hertfordshire Proposed Submission Local Plan. The following response is submitted on behalf of Anglian Water.

I would be grateful if you could confirm that you have received this response.

Policy SP7: Infrastructure requirements and developer contributions (legally compliant - yes and sound - yes)

Anglian Water is generally supportive of Policy SP7 as it states that planning permission will only be granted if it can be demonstrated that development proposals make provision for infrastructure that is necessary to accommodate the additional demands resulting from the development.

Policy SP9: Design and sustainability (legally compliant - yes and sound - yes)

It is noted that Policy SP9 includes a requirement for residential development to meet the optional water efficiency standard (110 litres per person per day). We would support the optional water efficiency standard being applied within the North Hertfordshire Local Plan area.

Policy SP11: Natural resources and sustainability (legally compliant - yes and sound - yes)

Policy SP11 includes a requirement to optimise the potential of the site to include the Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) prior to planning permission being granted. We support this requirement as it is important to maximise the potential use of the SuDS to ensure that new development does not increase the risk of surface water and sewer flooding.

Policy SP15: Site LG1 - North of Letchworth Garden City (legally compliant - yes and sound - no)

Historically, sewage treatment assets have been sited at a distance from sensitive land uses, in recognition that these are an incompatible use. Our concern is to prevent the encroachment of Anglian Water's assets by sensitive development which could give rise to future amenity loss and impose additional constraints on the operation of our assets.

The above strategic site is located within close proximity to Letchworth Water Recycling Centre (formerly sewage treatment works) in the ownership of Anglian Water.

Nuisance may be caused by noise, lighting and traffic movements but its most prevalent source will be odours, unavoidably generated by the treatment of sewerage. Where it is proposed to allocate sites within close proximity of the water recycling centres there is a need to consider further the odour impact and the extent to which sensitive development (that which is regularly occupied by people) could be accommodated on the site without having an adverse impact on future residents and/or employees who will be based on the site.

It is therefore suggested that Policy SP15 should be include the following wording:

'Undertake a detailed odour assessment to demonstrate no adverse impact on future residents and occupants of non residential buildings. To provide evidence to demonstrate that a suitable distance is provided from Letchworth Garden City Water Recycling Centre and sensitive development (buildings which are regularly occupied) as part of the detailed masterplanning of the site.'

Burymead Road (sites HE2 and HB3) (legally compliant - yes and sound no (effective)

Historically, sewage treatment assets have been sited at a distance from sensitive land uses, in recognition that these are an incompatible use. Our concern is to prevent the encroachment of Anglian Water's assets by sensitive development which could give rise to future amenity loss and impose additional constraints on the operation of our assets.

The above sites are located within close proximity to Hitchin Water Recycling Centre (formerly sewage treatment works) in the ownership of Anglian Water.

Nuisance may be caused by noise, lighting and traffic movements but its most prevalent source will be odours, unavoidably generated by the treatment of sewerage. Where it is proposed to allocate sites within close proximity of the water recycling centres there is a need to consider further the odour impact and the extent to which sensitive development (that which is regularly occupied by people) could be accommodated on the site without having an adverse impact on future residents and/or employees who will be based on the site.

It is therefore suggested that Policy HE2 and HB3 should include the following additional wording:

'Undertake a detailed odour assessment to demonstrate no adverse impact on occupants of non residential buildings. To provide evidence to demonstrate that a suitable distance is provided from Hitchin Water Recycling Centre and sensitive development (buildings which are regularly occupied) as part of the detailed masterplanning of the site.'

RY4: Land north of Lindsay Close (legally compliant - yes and sound no (effective)

Historically, sewage treatment assets have been sited at a distance from sensitive land uses, in recognition that these are an incompatible use. Our concern is to prevent the encroachment of Anglian Water's assets by sensitive development which could give rise to future amenity loss and impose additional constraints on the operation of our assets.

The above strategic site is located within close proximity to Royston Water Recycling Centre (formerly sewage treatment works) in the ownership of Anglian Water.

Nuisance may be caused by noise, lighting and traffic movements but its most prevalent source will be odours, unavoidably generated by the treatment of sewerage. Where it is proposed to allocate sites within close proximity of the water recycling centres there is a need to consider further the odour impact and the extent to which sensitive development (that which is regularly occupied by people) could be accommodated on the site without having an adverse impact on future residents and/or employees who will be based on the site.

We note that Policy RY4 includes reference to the preparation of an odour assessment for the above site which is welcomed. However it is unclear how the findings of the odour assessment (once prepared) would be considered further as part of the planning application process.

It is therefore suggested that Policy RY4 should be include the following wording:

'Undertake a detailed assessment of the impact of the Royston Water Recycling Centre in relation to odours, lighting, noise and traffic impacts to demonstrate no adverse impact on future residents. To provide evidence to demonstrate that a suitable distance is provided from Royston City Water Recycling Centre and sensitive development (buildings that are regularly occupied) as part of the detailed masterplanning of the site.'

RY8: Land at Lumen Road, Royston (legally compliant - yes and sound no (justified and effective)

We closely monitor growth in our region and develop investment plans to reduce flow and load from the catchment or provide additional treatment capacity when appropriate. Reference is made to development of this allocation site being phased in relation to the improvements at Royston Sewage Treatment Works. It is unclear why this has been identified a specific requirement for this allocation site only and no other sites within the Royston catchment.

It is therefore suggested that the fifth bullet point of Policy RY8 should be deleted as follows:

Phasing of development to link with Sewage Treatment Works improvements;

Policy D1: Sustainable design (legally compliant - yes and sound - yes)

Policy D1 includes a requirement to optimise the potential of the site to incorporate Sustainable Drainage Systems (SuDS) prior to planning permission being granted. We support this requirement as it is important to maximise the potential use of the SuDS to ensure that new development does not increase the risk of surface water and sewer flooding.

It is also noted that Policy D1 includes a requirement for residential development to meet or exceed the optional water efficiency standard (110 litres per person per day). We would support the optional water efficiency standard being applied or exceeded within the North Hertfordshire Local Plan area.

Policy NE8: Sustainable drainage systems (legally compliant - yes and sound - yes)

We support the requirement that drainage solution follow the SuDs hierarchy as this will ensure that disposal of surface water to the public sewerage network will be only be considered where it is demonstrated that there are no suitable alternatives. This will help to ensure that new development does not increase the risk of surface water and sewer flooding.

Policy NE10 : Water Framework Directive and wastewater infrastructure (legally compliant - yes and sound - (justified and effective)

Reference is made to new or improved waste infrastructure being secured under the requirements of Policy SP7.

In general, water recycling centre (previously referred to as sewage or wastewater treatment works) upgrades where required to provide for additional growth are wholly funded by Anglian Water through our Asset Management Plan. Foul network improvements are generally funded/part funded through developer contribution via the relevant sections of the Water Industry Act 1991. The foul infrastructure requirements will be dependant on the location, size and phasing of the development. All sites will require a local connection to the existing sewerage network which may include network upgrades.

As set above we seek contributions directly from developers in accordance with the provisions of the Water Industry Act 1991. Therefore Anglian Water would not expect there to be provision within planning obligations sought by the District Council or Community Infrastructure Levy in accordance with planning legislation.

The majority of allocations sites proposed within the Anglian Water region are expected to require improvements to the foul sewerage network. Please see enclosed spreadsheet for further information. It is important to note that the impact on the foul sewerage network and relevant water recycling centres have been assessed on an individual site basis.

Therefore we would suggest Policy NE10 should be amended to make it clear that applicants will be expected to demonstrate that there is capacity within foul sewerage network and at the relevant water recycling centre or that capacity can be made available in time to serve the development.

It is therefore suggested that Policy NE10 be amended as follows:

'Mechanisms for delivering any necessary new or improved water and wastewater infrastructure are secured under the requirements of Policy SP7. Adequate foul water treatment and disposal already exists or can be provided in time to serve the development.'

Attendance at examination

Where we have sought modifications to the wording of proposed Local Plan policies as set out above we would wish to participate at the examination.

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 6120

Received: 21/11/2016

Respondent: Rumball Sedgwick

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation:

Object to D1: Adds nothing to NPPF, reference to SPD, references to national standards inadvisable due to constant change

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 6315

Received: 30/11/2016

Respondent: Mr Colin Bogie

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation:

Object to D1: Design SPD conflicts with proposed policies and allocations

Full text:

See attached

Object

Local Plan 2011-2031 Proposed Submission Draft

Representation ID: 6626

Received: 29/11/2016

Respondent: Bellcross Company LTD

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

Representation:

Object to D1: Support motives but site specific circumstances and viability should be taken into consideration in its application.

Full text:

See attachment