Regulation 18 Draft Local Plan

Object

Representation ID: 2421

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Vistry Group

Agent: Boyer Planning

The summary provided on page 235 of the Regulation 18 document details that “An
Infrastructure Delivery Plan, including an Infrastructure Delivery Schedule, is being prepared and will inform the policy once finalised.” We are concerned that the details of these important evidence base documents are not provided at this stage of the plan making process to allow for engagement and representations to be made on approach, requirements and timescales envisaged.

Paragraph 13.16 of the Regulation 18 document confirms that the Council will continue to seek developer contributions through Section 106 and may consider the introduction of a Community Infrastructure Levy or a replacement tariff following the Governments national review. Although we broadly support this approach, the Local Plan needs to provide an indication as to the level of Section 106 that may be requested for different types of development in different parts of the plan area. Without this clarification, the Council’s Viability Appraisal is flawed because assumptions used in relation to Section 106 may not be accurate and therefore could be under or over stating requirements that need to meet the tests for planning obligations.

Object

Representation ID: 2422

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Vistry Group

Agent: Boyer Planning

Policy ID1 outlines the Council expectations for ensuring that the necessary infrastructure is provided at the appropriate time and in a suitable location. It is important that the policy and supporting text recognise that as part of development opportunities the provision of infrastructure is not solely within the “gift” of the developer/applicant. In most instances, the Section 106 obligation can provide the land and/or funds to aid the provision of infrastructure but often the service provider (such as education, utilities) is responsible for the delivery of the infrastructure. As a result, it is unreasonable to expect that development proposals provide the necessary infrastructure at an appropriate time as this fails to acknowledge the range of parties that need to align and be involved with bringing forward the infrastructure.

Object

Representation ID: 2423

Received: 25/04/2024

Respondent: Vistry Group

Agent: Boyer Planning

Policy ID3 intends to ensure that broadband connectivity in South Kesteven can meet the vital needs of all over the plan period. It is reasonable to identify this as a key policy consideration as all sectors of the community, both residents and businesses rely more than ever on access to broadband and communications networks. We are concerned however, that the policy and supporting text only focuses on what a developer is required to integrate into their development and fails to hold the communications providers to account for the overall network. The requirement to “future proof” is understood but this needs to be considered further to reflect that across South Kesteven the overall network will be mixed with some locations benefiting from greater connections than others, reflecting the urban and rural communities.