Local Plan Issues and Options (Regulation 18)

Comment

Representation ID: 7920

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8409
Yes – to provide and maintain local distinctiveness and separation


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7921

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8410
Given its status and scale it ought to accommodate a scale of new growth that is commensurate with its population share of the Borough and not exceed this.


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7923

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8412
Yes – but given its status and scale it ought to only accommodate a scale of new growth that is commensurate with its population share of the Borough and not exceed this.


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7924

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8413
No


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7925

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8414
Yes – but given its status and scale it ought to only accommodate a scale of new growth that is commensurate with its population share of the Borough and not exceed this.


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7926

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8415
Yes – but given its status and scale it ought to only accommodate a scale of new growth that is commensurate with its population share of the Borough and not exceed this.


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7927

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8416
No – retaining and not amending DM19 is a mistake for the following reasons: • Few sites in the rural area meet the Brownfield Register threshold • Many sites may not have access to public transport (see NPPF 110) • The bar is set too high by Criterion 7 in DM19 not to lead to a high degree of subjectivity creeping in • NPPF provides overarching guidance and any policy must reflect Grey Belt guidance in this and the PPG


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7928

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8417
It may be beneficial – although there is no reason why the countryside policy cannot be combined and duplicate the GB elements in that sites in the countryside are provided with the same exceptions provided for Green Belt through the NPPF – for example, there is no rational reason why GB sites can be redeveloped/converted and open countryside ones are unable to benefit from such provision


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7929

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8418
Employment, tourism, recreation and residential uses are (and can be) appropriate alternative uses in the countryside


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.

Comment

Representation ID: 7930

Received: 03/09/2025

Respondent: Acresfield Development Discretionary Trust

I&O_8419
No


Extension was agreed. Original email was received in time but had errors in question numbers so updated information was requested.