Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Search representations

Results for Vulcan Property II Limited search

New search New search

Object

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SCC2 – Energy Infrastructure

Representation ID: 838

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

Draft policy SCC2 sets out that:

‘Any development including ten homes or more, or non-residential floorspace of 1,000m2 or more must include opportunities for decentralised energy provision within the site, unless it can be demonstrated that the development is not suitable, feasible or viable for district heat or decentralised energy networks.’

Paragraph 16 of the Framework (2023) is clear that development plans should contain policies that are clearly written and unambiguous.

Draft policy SCC2 is not clear in respect of on what grounds applicants will be able to demonstrate that development is not suitable, feasible or viable for district heat or decentralised power networks. Draft policy SCC2 needs to provide clear direction in this regard. It is also without justification why the threshold for compliance is ten units/1,000 sq. m and why there are no further thresholds at greater unit numbers/floorspace, which would allow for proportionate consideration of proposals relative to scale. The draft policy should be revised to remove ambiguity and introduce additional trigger thresholds to ensure that it is sound in the context of being clear and positively prepared.

Object

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SCC3 – Managing Heat Risk

Representation ID: 839

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

Draft policy SCC2 (Energy Infrastructure) sets minimum thresholds for development proposals to which the policy applies. Policy SSC3 is drafted such that it applies to all development proposals without distinction. Whilst all development proposals can be subject to design materials choices in the context of managing heat risk, it is potentially only on larger development sites where there is the potential for layout and orientation choices to have a nearing on heat risk. Similarly, the cooling hierarchy set out in the draft policy is not necessarily appropriate or applicable to all development proposals.

Paragraph 16 of the Framework (2023) is clear that development plans should contain policies that are clearly written and unambiguous. Draft policy SCC3 should be revised such that it is clear for which size/scale of development the draft policy can be reasonably applied and include a clear indication of on what grounds applicants will be able to demonstrate that expectations cannot be viably or reasonably met, including in context with the cooling hierarchy. Added clarification is necessary to ensure that the draft policy is sound in the context of it being clear, positively prepared and fit for purpose in seeking to managing in the most effective way heat risk from new development.

Comment

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SCC4 – Flood Risk

Representation ID: 840

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

Draft policy SCC4 (13) should be clear on what basis the proposed distance limitations on development that is proximate to an ordinary watercourse are derived. It should also include detailed justification for the proposed limitations, and how the policy text as drafted relates to any local byelaws set under the Land Drainage Act 1991.

Object

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SCC5 - Sustainable drainage and surface water management

Representation ID: 841

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

Paragraph 169 of the Framework states that:
‘Major developments should incorporate sustainable drainage systems unless there is clear evidence that this would be inappropriate’. The draft text to Policy SCC5 states that ‘All new developments should incorporate SuDS and all development proposals should provide details of adoption, ongoing maintenance, and management of SuDS’.

The proposed policy SCC5 requirement that all new development incorporate SuDS is inconsistent with the Framework and should be amended to meet the test of soundness.

Paragraph 167(c) of the Framework (2023) states the requirement for development proposed in an area at risk of flooding incorporate sustainable drainage systems is also subject to a caveat ‘…unless there is clear evidence that this would be inappropriate’. This should be reflected in the draft development plan policy.

Comment

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SCC6 – Renewable and Low Carbon Energy and BREEAM Standards

Representation ID: 842

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

The supporting text to draft policy SSC6 (paragraph 5.59) discusses the requirement that major developments achieve a 31% carbon reduction improvement upon the Part L requirement of The Building Regulations 2010 (as amended).

The supporting text (paragraph 5.62) also includes the caveat, in respect of all new development contributing towards renewable and low carbon energy generation, that it is not practical to provide more than 20% renewable energy generation within a new development.

Object

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SHW3 – Air Quality

Representation ID: 843

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

Paragraph 186 of the Framework (2023) sets out that planning policies should sustain and contribute towards compliance with relevant limit values or national objectives for pollutants, taking in account the presence of Air Quality Management Areas and Clear Air Zones, and the cumulative impacts form individual sites in local areas. Planning policies and decisions should ensure that new development can be integrated effectively with existing businesses and community facilities. Paragraph 188 of the Framework (2023) is clear that the focus of planning policies and decisions should be on whether proposed development is an acceptable use of land, rather than control of processes or emissions (where these are subject to separate pollution control regimes).

Policy SHW3 includes a blanket statement that new development must be at least air quality neutral. This element of the draft policy does not reflect the Framework or the Planning Practice Guidance, in its blanket approach. The PPG sets out that plans may need to consider:

- what are the observed trends shown by recent air quality monitoring data and what would happen to these trends in light of proposed development and / or allocations;
- the impact of point sources of air pollution (pollution that originates from one place);
- the potential cumulative impact of a number of smaller developments on air quality as well as the effect of more substantial developments, including their implications for vehicle emissions;
- ways in which new development could be made appropriate in locations where air quality is or is likely to be a concern, and not give rise to unacceptable risks from pollution. This could, for example, entail identifying measures for offsetting the impact on air quality arising from new development including supporting measures in an air quality action plan or low emissions strategy where applicable; and
- opportunities to improve air quality or mitigate impacts, such as through traffic and travel management and green infrastructure provision and enhancement7.

The PPG continues to explain that the test is the impact of proposed development and potential impact on future occupants:

- whether the proposed development could significantly change air quality during the construction and operational phases (and the consequences of this for public health and biodiversity); and whether occupiers or users of the development could experience poor living conditions or health due to poor air quality8.
A requirement for development being air quality neutral is justified where there are sensitive receptors such that anything other than air quality neutral would be unacceptable or a proposed development would otherwise lead to a deterioration in existing poor air quality. For the policy to pass the test of soundness it should add criteria into its air quality neutral requirement, to set out on what basis such an expectation is justified and how an applicant might demonstrate the acceptability of a development ion circumstances where such a requirement is justified.

Comment

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SHW4– Open Space and Recreation

Representation ID: 844

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

Policy SHW4 states that: ‘All new housing sites providing over ten units will be expected to contribute towards the provision of unrestricted open space, in line with the standards set out in Appendix K. Where such provision on- site would make a site unviable or where there is no physical capacity to include it, the Council will in exceptional circumstances accept a commuted sum for nearby off-site provision in lieu or for the improvement of existing facilities within walking distance.’

The policy is rightly targeted at major development proposals but fails to acknowledge that the expectation of contribution to unrestricted open space should be based upon whether there is a demonstrable shortfall locally of unrestricted open space.

Comment

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SHO1 - Delivering Sustainable Housing Growth

Representation ID: 845

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

Policy SHO1 discussed that the Sandwell Local Plan will deliver at least 11,167 net new homes over the period 2022-2041.

Table 5 discusses the Housing Land Supply for the borough setting out the minimum housing target of the plan period and the key sources of housing land supply. The total from identified sites is 9,080, with the remainder a windfall allowance.

Policy SHO1 should be clear on how the quoted requirement of net additional homes is arrived at.

Comment

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SHO3 - Housing Density, Type and Accessibility

Representation ID: 846

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

... The supporting text to policy SHO3 should be explicit that the table which follows paragraph 7.22 is not setting an expected mix of home tenures and types for all development sites, rather it is presenting the assessed overall requirement for the Sandwell area.

Policy SHO3 should be consistent with policy SHO4 and policy SHO5 and be explicit that the dwelling mix and any mix of tenures will be site specific and subject to a consideration of local needs at the time of a proposed development coming forward.

Object

Draft Regulation 18 Sandwell Local Plan

Policy SHO4 - Affordable Housing

Representation ID: 847

Received: 18/12/2023

Respondent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Agent: Vulcan Property II Limited

Representation Summary:

... the reference to a ‘minimum proportion of affordable housing’ to be provided is inconsistent with the earlier stance on viability and potentially ambiguous, given that there will be some sites where no affordable housing is financially viable.
The inconsistency between dependence upon financial viability and a minimum requirement falls short of being unambiguous. This element potentially fails the test of soundness and is inconsistent with the Framework (2023).

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.