Part One: Spatial Strategy and Policies (Regulation 19)

Object

Representation ID: 1378

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The proposed policies for protecting biodiversity and geodiversity, particularly Policy DLP31, are not considered robust or aligned with national policy requirements. The policy provides excessive protection for regionally designated nature sites, potentially conflicting with the need to address emerging housing needs. It is suggested that the policy be modified to better reflect national policy and allow for sensitive development on sites like Land at Corbett's Hospital, while ensuring that stricter policies, if implemented, are fully justified.

Object

Representation ID: 1380

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

This proposed policy duplicates existing national policy and legislative requirements. This policy should be reviewed by the Council in accordance with the requirements of Paragraph 16 of the Framework, which requires polices to serve a clear purpose and avoid duplication. It is considered that the policy is unnecessary, given the mandatory requirements set out in national legislation, and therefore the Council should delete this proposed policy.

Object

Representation ID: 1381

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

This proposed policy seeks to establish a requirement for major development to provide a minimum of 20% canopy tree cover across the development site. Whilst these aspirations are positive and the principle of securing planting of new trees is supported, the policy fails to acknowledge the implications of delivering this requirement on the capacity, and resultant viability, of development sites. This is particularly critical given that much of the Borough’s housing requirement is proposed to be met on brownfield sites within the existing urban area, and the failure within the Plan to identify sufficient sites to meet the housing need. Other considerations including mandatory biodiversity net gain should also be recognised, with competing requirements likely to impact the amount of development that can realistically be achieved on sites.

It is therefore considered that if the authority wants to continue to request this through policy, this should identified as aspirational and to be delivered where feasible and deliverable. Given the constraints presented to housing delivery within Dudley, the Council should recognise the imperative to ensure that an effective use of land is made and that the delivery of sites is not unduly constrained by arbitrary policy requirements. This policy should also be streamlined, removing unnecessary items that are covered through existing national policy or legislation such as relating to ancient woodland or veteran trees. National policy set out in Paragraph 16 of the Framework requires policy to be clearly written and unambiguous, and serve a clear purpose, whilst some of the requirements set out in this policy as currently drafted would be better placed within supporting text or supplementary planning guidance, to ensure that the Plan is drafted in an appropriate way.

Object

Representation ID: 1383

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The Borough's vision for urban renaissance and environmental transformation, particularly in creating accessible green spaces for health and wellbeing, is strongly supported. However, the draft Policy fails to ensure that green spaces not only be protected but also function effectively, as seen in the case of the Corbett Hospital site, which could provide public access to an existing green space. The site, currently in private ownership and agricultural use, could contribute more to the Borough’s green network if developed for public access. The Council is urged to focus on maximizing the value of open spaces while balancing other priorities like housing delivery and accessibility.

Object

Representation ID: 1386

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

National policy establishes the importance of good design for achieving sustainable development. It is considered that the Council’s proposed design policy however is not considered to be consistent with national policy, and is overly lengthy as currently drafted. The policy seeks to cover a range of topics and references a range of different forms of policy and guidance, resulting in a protracted policy. The policy would be more effective should the Council focus on what the key expectations are in respect of design locally, with supporting text referencing where appropriate other supplementary policy or guidance that the authority expect developers to take into account.

In particular, the requirement for proposals to be compliant with national space standards, should be justified, if the Council consider that the evidence has identified that this is necessary. Footnote 52 of the Framework confirms that policies can make use of nationally described space standards, where the need is justified, and it is not considered that the Council has done so through the draft Plan or accompanying evidence base. Whilst the supporting text references that it is not expected that this requirement would impact on development viability, it is not considered that the Plan provides adequate justification for this to form a policy requirement.

Object

Representation ID: 1390

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

These three policies in the emerging Plan set out various policy measures relating to sustainable design and construction in order to achieve the Council’s aspiration of mitigating and adapting to climate change. As identified through previous representations, it is considered that the policies should be reviewed and amalgamated, in order to streamline policy requirements and reduce duplication, consistent with the requirements of Paragraph 16 of the Framework. It should be considered whether policy requirements could be identified in more simple terms, with more detailed policy suggestions identified through Supplementary Planning Documents, whilst also recognising the increased requirements for renewable energy and other sustainable technologies advanced through changes to Building Regulations.

Object

Representation ID: 1392

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

These three policies in the emerging Plan set out various policy measures relating to sustainable design and construction in order to achieve the Council’s aspiration of mitigating and adapting to climate change. As identified through previous representations, it is considered that the policies should be reviewed and amalgamated, in order to streamline policy requirements and reduce duplication, consistent with the requirements of Paragraph 16 of the Framework. It should be considered whether policy requirements could be identified in more simple terms, with more detailed policy suggestions identified through Supplementary Planning Documents, whilst also recognising the increased requirements for renewable energy and other sustainable technologies advanced through changes to Building Regulations.

Object

Representation ID: 1393

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

These three policies in the emerging Plan set out various policy measures relating to sustainable design and construction in order to achieve the Council’s aspiration of mitigating and adapting to climate change. As identified through previous representations, it is considered that the policies should be reviewed and amalgamated, in order to streamline policy requirements and reduce duplication, consistent with the requirements of Paragraph 16 of the Framework. It should be considered whether policy requirements could be identified in more simple terms, with more detailed policy suggestions identified through Supplementary Planning Documents, whilst also recognising the increased requirements for renewable energy and other sustainable technologies advanced through changes to Building Regulations.

Object

Representation ID: 1394

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The Borough's goal to connect and extend the Green Infrastructure network is supported, but the policy's requirement for a minimum 15m width is seen as arbitrary and lacking justification. The roles and functions of the Green Network, such as serving both as a wildlife corridor and recreational space, are questioned for potential conflict, especially in urban areas where some functions may be more suited to rural settings. The Council should balance enhancing the green network with other development needs, including housing and employment land. It is argued that sites like Corbetts Hospital could contribute to the green network while also supporting housing development with sensitive design and recreational space.

Object

Representation ID: 1395

Received: 27/11/2024

Respondent: Charles Church Homes

Number of people: 2

Agent: Claremont Planning Consultancy

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? Yes

The proposed policy seeks to secure the protection of non-designated heritage assets, to the same level as designated assets, which could comprise a wide range of landscapes or townscapes in addition to buildings and structures, in a highly restrictive manner that is not consistent with the Framework. The Framework at Paragraph 203, in respect of non-designated assets, requires that a ‘balanced judgement’ be made, having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset. It is considered that the policy should be amended to reflect the level of protection afforded to non-designated heritage assets through the Framework.