Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
Search representations
Results for Castle Point Borough Council search
New searchSupport
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H1 Distribution - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3325
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
It is important to prioritise the use of previously developed land, however CPBC recognise that to avoid over-development of the existing urban area it is necessary to allocate sites on the urban periphery for residential development.
CPBC would seek to ensure that urban periphery sites allocated for residential development are assessed with regard to their contribution to the functions of the GreenBelt in PPG2. They should also be assessed with regard to their contribution to sustainable development and benefits for the wider community. Allocated sites must be deliverable in order to achieve the required level of housing.
Castle Point Borough Council (CPBC) support Rochford District Council's approach to the provision and distribution of housing. It is important to prioritise the use of previously developed land, however CPBC recognise that to avoid over development of the existing urban area it is necessary to allocate sites on the urban periphery for residential development.
CPBC would seek to ensure that urban periphery sites allocated for residential development are assessed with regard to their contribution to the functions of the Green Belt as set out in PPG2. Urban periphery sites should also be assessed with regard to their potential contribution to sustainable development and benefits for the wider community. It is crucial that allocated sites are deliverable in order to achieve the required level of housing provision as set out in the East of England Plan.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H3 General Locations Post-2021 - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3326
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
CPBC agree that it is necessary to identify general areas for residential development post 2021. In-line with the East of England Plan any review of Green Belt boundaries should identify sufficient land to avoid further review before 2031.
CPBC agree that it is necessary to identify general areas for residential development post 2021. In-line with the East of England Plan any review of Green Belt boundaries should identify sufficient land to avoid further review before 2031.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H4 Affordable Housing - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3327
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
CPBC support the 35% affordable housing target, in line with the East of England Plan. A flexible approach in exceptional circumstances is important to ensure developments remain viable and sites are deliverable. The possibility of contributing towards off-site affordable housing offers flexibility potentially enhancing the deliverability of a site. However in line with PPS 3: Housing, off-site provision should only be accepted were it is robustly justified.
CPBC support the 35% affordable housing target, in line with the East of England Plan. A flexible approach in exceptional circumstances is important to ensure developments remain viable and sites are deliverable. The possibility of contributing towards off-site affordable housing offers flexibility potentially enhancing the deliverability of a site. However in line with PPS 3: Housing, off-site provision should only be accepted were it is robustly justified.
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
H5 Dwelling Types - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3328
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
CPBC supports the requirement for a mix of dwelling types to ensure they cater for all people within the local community.
CPBC supports the requirement for a mix of dwelling types to ensure they cater for all people within the local community.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
GB1 Green Belt Protection - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3329
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
CPBC support the protection of the Green Belt and the release of Green Belt based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt and separation of settlements.
CPBC support the protection of the Green Belt and the release of Green Belt based on how well the land helps to achieve the purposes of the Green Belt and separation of settlements.
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
ED5 - Eco-Enterprise Centre - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3330
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
CPBC would encourage Rochford DC to prepare evidence that demonstrates the deliverability of the eco-enterprise centre. It is important to ensure that the Core Strategy is realistic and achievable.
CPBC would encourage Rochford DC to prepare evidence that demonstrates the deliverability of the eco-enterprise centre. It is important to ensure that the Core Strategy is realistic and achievable.
Support
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
ENV5 Air Quality - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3331
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
CPBC support the protection and improvement of air quality, however the preferred option lacks clarity regarding measures that will be taken to improve air quality.
CPBC support the protection and improvement of air quality, however the preferred option lacks clarity regarding measures that will be taken to improve air quality.
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
ENV8 Code for Sustainable Homes - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3332
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
CPBC has been advised by developers that Code level 3 is achievable however Level 4 and beyond significantly impacts on the economic viability of the development. The requirement for meeting level 6 by 2013 should be tested at a local level to determine viability and help the Council defend this policy at examination. The same testing is suggested for the application of BREEAM standards to other forms of development.
CPBC has been advised by developers that Code level 3 is achievable however Level 4 and beyond significantly impacts on the economic viability of the development. The requirement for meeting level 6 by 2013 should be tested at a local level to determine viability and help the Council defend this policy at examination. The same testing is suggested for the application of BREEAM standards to other forms of development.
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
T1 Highways - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3333
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
CPBC support attempts to reduce reliance on the private car however it is important not to overestimate how much this reliance can be reduced. It is therefore essential to recognise that highway improvements may still be required. These should be planned for in order to maximise the benefits of developer contributions where appropriate.
CPBC support attempts to reduce reliance on the private car however it is important not to overestimate how much this reliance can be reduced. It is therefore essential to recognise that highway improvements may still be required. These should be planned for in order to maximise the benefits of developer contributions where appropriate.
Comment
Core Strategy Preferred Options (Revised October 2008)
CLT1 Planning Obligations and Standard Charges - Preferred Option
Representation ID: 3334
Received: 26/11/2008
Respondent: Castle Point Borough Council
The use of standard charges is consistent with circular 5/05 planning obligations. Standard charges provide greater certainty for developers. Developer contributions should however be the subject of negotiation as there may be economic viability reasons why the value of a development may not be able to support the standard charge.
The use of standard charges is consistent with circular 5/05 planning obligations. Standard charges provide greater certainty for developers. Developer contributions should however be the subject of negotiation as there may be economic viability reasons why the value of a development may not be able to support the standard charge.
