Support

Representation ID: 24219

Received: 17/11/2015

Respondent: Historic England

We welcome the proposed main modification to Policy CS4, which largely addresses our concerns with the Proposed Submission draft. Although the additional wording to the third sentence does not fully reflect our suggested wording, the modification does enough to overcome our concerns. Amending 'historical' to 'heritage' in the first sentence is also welcomed.

While it does not form part of the current public consultation, we note and welcome the additional modifications to paragraphs 8.46, 8.53 and 8.55.

Object

Representation ID: 24293

Received: 23/11/2015

Respondent: Save Our Country Spaces

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

The Greenways Project never had any input on CS10 area. There is omission on the data (SPD) which exists for NF and IGS. The modifications are more likely to compromise CS4. CS1 - CS6 may be undeliverable and therefore CS11-20 may be undeliverable.

Object

Representation ID: 24311

Received: 21/12/2015

Respondent: Gladman Developments

Legally compliant? Not specified

Sound? Not specified

Duty to co-operate? Not specified

We have concerns with the proposed modification, which refers to using planning obligations to 'secure the enhancement and promotion of the significance of any heritage asset'.
Three tests for the use of planning obligations are set out in Regulation 122, Paragraph 2 of the CIL Regulations (as amended):
A planning obligation may only constitute a reason for granting planning permission for the development if the obligation is—
(a) necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms;
(b) directly related to the development; and
(c) fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.

Object

Representation ID: 24314

Received: 21/12/2015

Respondent: Mr Matt Clarke

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The modification to Policy CS4 (Protecting our Assets) seeks to widen the scope of the protection that the policy offers to heritage assets by making specific reference to the maintenance of a list of buildings and other heritage assets of local importance, and taking steps to reduce the number of heritage assets at risk. Whilst the intentions of the Council to safeguard the historic environment are acknowledged and supported in principle, the modifications could place additional unnecessary restrictions upon development, particularly in relation to sites which are categorised as undesignated heritage assets.