Object

Representation ID: 4812

Received: 24/02/2023

Respondent: Trine Developments Limited

Agent: Cerda Planning

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

It is important that the masterplan prepared for the site does not prejudice the fair delivery of development on Site 420, which is a key link between the exisitng built form of Penkridge and the main bulk of the strategic allocation north of Penkridge.

In terms of the requirements for a Transport Strategy for the site to be developed the plan appears to be supported by a Strategic Transport Assessment for Land North of Penkridge prepared by PJA and included within the Council's evidence base. We raise concerns regarding the status of this document given that we as one of the site promoters have not been provided with the opportunity to feed in to either its scope or contents.The current indicative masterplan does not include direct access to Trine's land from the A449 which should not be assumed as a previous planning application to the Council showed that this was achievable with no objections from the highways authorities.

In regard to the provision of a Community Hub within the development, this element of the proposed allocation should be supported by evidence. Evidence of the need for such uses must be presented for that requirement to be justified. Should appropriate evidence be provided, and the requirement retained, the policy should be updated to give specific guidance in relation to the floorspaces and use classes being sought, so that the policy requirement is clearly written and unambiguous in accordance with the NPPF.

The principles of part g) of the policy are supported. However, the requirement to provide compensatory Green Belt Improvements are somewhat confusing as they do not appear to apply to this site. The site is outwith the defined Green Belt and when cross referenced with the requirements of Policy DS2: Green Belt Compensatory Improvements the development of the site falls outside of the scope of this policy. The need for the riverside linear park is understood but this should not be a compensatory requirement for the removal of other sites within the District or Penkridge from the Green Belt and in any event any compensatory improvements should be undertaken within the Green Belt. As such reference to compensatory Green Belt improvements should be removed from the policy.