Site Allocations and Policies (Incorporating IP-One Area Action Plan) Development Plan Document (DPD) Main Modifications

Object

Representation ID: 26809

Received: 23/09/2021

Respondent: Seven Group

Agent: Mr Matt Clarke

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

IP054b: Object to the intended residential element being referred to as the primary use. Given the bulk and scale of some of the existing buildings present on the allocation site as a whole, it is felt that achievement of the indicative target capacity of 40 dwellings could be secured on a relatively small portion of the site, meaning that this would not necessarily represent the primary use. Also object to inclusion of detail previously within site sheet as detailed criteria at this late stage in the Local Plan process. It is of concern, as a matter of principle, that information previously contained as guidance or information within the Site Sheets is now proposed to be included as “Policy” through this Main Modifications process. This is on the basis that this would now have increased status in the decision making process relative to its previous presentation within an Appendix. An example of this is the requirement under criteria a. for flood risk assessment for any development proposals, or under criteria d. for archaeological assessment. A preferred approach would be to note that in all instances a degree of discretion will be applied, in accordance with the acknowledgement under criteria c. for instance, that Heritage Impact Assessment will be required on a proportionate basis.
In respect of criteria n. it should be clarified that S106 contributions will apply to residential development proposals, as distinct from uses within the other commercial use class allowed for, unless this is considered to be adequately covered by reference to the term “as appropriate.”
The apparent change from a residential-led allocation to a more balanced mixed use approach is supported by Seven Group. A mixed use approach is more appropriate.

Support

Representation ID: 26810

Received: 23/09/2021

Respondent: Seven Group

Agent: Mr Matt Clarke

Noted that much of the text included in the proposed supporting text to this new policy has been drawn from the relevant Site Sheet previously contained within Appendix 3 of the Submission Plan. On this basis we have no objection to this, and consider that this provides generally provides helpful commentary. Within the fourth new paragraph of supporting text it is noted that reference is made to the need for introduction of a landmark building at the corner of Star Lane and Turret Lane, highlighting the adjacent cylindrical building at the junction of Star Lane and St Peter’s Street as an example of best practice in this regard. As this forms part of Seven Group’s existing premises they are naturally pleased that it has been referred to in this context, and hopefully provides comfort and reassurance of their track record and willingness to work with IBC.

Support

Representation ID: 26811

Received: 23/09/2021

Respondent: Seven Group

Agent: Mr Matt Clarke

It is noted that reference is made within this proposed modification to the support that will be given to improving the pedestrian environment on key walking routes from the Waterfront to the Central Shopping Area, including along Turret Lane. We have no objection to this strengthening of the north-south axis in this manner and consider that developments that will increase activity levels in the area whilst improving the visual appearance of the streetscene and safeguarding the existing alignment of routes through Turret Lane should support this objective.