Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Search representations
Results for Hugh Crane Ltd search
New searchObject
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 1: Please comment on or highlight any inaccuracies within the introduction
Representation ID: 22281
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hugh Crane Ltd
Agent: Savills
For full representation, please refer to the attached documents
The draft GNLP therefore does not do what it says it does – it is not a single plan for the Greater Norwich area, prepared jointly by the three Districts.
Without sight of the ‘South Norfolk Village Clusters Housing Site Allocations’ document:
• it is impossible to know whether sufficient sites will be found for the 1,200 new homes assigned to that area / document; and
• there is no evidence to demonstrate that overall pattern of development will be an appropriate and sustainable strategy, taking into account the reasonable alternatives, based on proportionate evidence.
For full submission, please refer to attached documents
Object
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 13: Do you agree with the proposed Settlement Hierarchy and the proposed distribution of housing within the hierarchy?
Representation ID: 22282
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hugh Crane Ltd
Agent: Savills
For full representation, please refer to the attached documents.
Support is given to the approach to focus development on the area around Norwich but additional consideration should be given to the inclusion of Blofield and Blofield Heath within the Strategic Growth Area to support growth aspirations for Greater Norwich.
Furthermore additional consideration should be given to the grouping of access to facilities at Blofield and Blofield Heath given the approach taken within the Neighbourhood Plan.
Consequentially it is considered appropriate to allocate additional growth to Blofield Heath.
For full submission, please refer to attached documents
Object
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 14: Do you support, object or wish to comment on the approach for housing numbers and delivery?
Representation ID: 22283
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hugh Crane Ltd
Agent: Savills
For full representation, please refer to the attached documents.
For the reasons set out above, there appears to be a conflict within the draft Greater Norwich Local Plan in respect of the aspiration to make to most of economic growth potential however only planning for the minimum number of new homes throughout the plan period.
Allocation of additional housing at ‘Land to the east of Woodbastwick Road, Blofield Heath’ (Draft Policy GNLP1048) will assist the Local Planning Authorities in boosting the supply of housing within Greater Norwich.
For full submission, please refer to attached documents
Object
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 18: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the preferred approach to sustainable communities including the requirement for a sustainability statement?
Representation ID: 22284
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hugh Crane Ltd
Agent: Savills
For full representation, please refer to the attached documents.
The requirement that all new development provide a 20% reduction against Part L of the 2013 Building Regulations is not supported by the evidence that the policy relies upon.
There is no justification for the lack of any alternative approaches.
Consideration could be given to wording which ‘encourages a 20% reduction against Part L of the 2013 Building Regulations’.
For full submission, please refer to attached documents
Object
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 19: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the specific requirements of the policy?
Representation ID: 22285
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hugh Crane Ltd
Agent: Savills
The requirement that all new development provide a 20% reduction against Part L of the 2013 Building Regulations is not supported by the evidence that the policy relies upon.
There is no justification for the lack of any alternative approaches.
Consideration could be given to wording which ‘encourages a 20% reduction against Part L of the 2013 Building Regulations’.
For full submission, please refer to attached documents
Object
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 27: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to approach to affordable homes?
Representation ID: 22286
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hugh Crane Ltd
Agent: Savills
There is no evidence to justify the proposed 33% requirement as set out in the draft Policy. It is recommended that the Greater Norwich Authorities update the evidence base and update the policy to reflect the identified need.
To make the draft policy effective clarity needs to be provided regarding the reference to “at least’ 33% housing.
For full submission, please refer to attached documents
Comment
Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy
Question 28: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to space standards?
Representation ID: 22287
Received: 16/03/2020
Respondent: Hugh Crane Ltd
Agent: Savills
Broad support is given to the identification of an approach to facilitate development at village locations. However, objection is made to the indicative amount of growth proposed for each cluster as the approach is considered to be arbitrary; particularly where it is proposed that sustainable development sites will been unnecessary limited.
Strong support is given to the identification of ‘Land to the east of Woodbastwick Road, Blofield Heath’ (Policy GNLP1048) It is considered that additional housing should be allocated at ‘Land to the east of Woodbastwick Road, Blofield Heath’ (Policy GNLP1048).
The precise amount of housing should be identified in discussion with the landowner.
For full submission, please refer to attached documents