K: Proposed Policy - Infrastructure and developer contributions

Object

Representation ID: 1789

Received: 19/07/2011

In light of the CIL regulations and Reg122 in particular, strategic infrastructure should only be sought following the formal adoption and thorough viability tested examination of the CIL charging schedule.

Comment

Representation ID: 1836

Received: 05/08/2011

It is not clear what effect the changes referred to in paragraph 6.71 will have.

Support

Representation ID: 1966

Received: 30/08/2011

Support in principle. All very well, but the infrastructure in terms of community facilities is already below par; with reduced contributions to retain site viability for affordable housing, and the changes after 2014, the policy may not deliver that which is needed. Its existence alone cannot be considered adequate reason for pushing ahead with developments that will require increased infrastructure.

Comment

Representation ID: 1999

Received: 04/08/2011

Need to distinguish between existing infrastructure needs and new/additional infrastructure capacity required to support development. Should also include HBC in the list of infrastructure providers.

Part 3 of policy should emphasise that CIL may be used to fund any infrastructure required to support planned development, regardless of whether it is related to contributing development and/or identified in the IDP.

Last paragraph should at least lean towards confirming it will be necessary to introduce CIL before 2028.

Suggested text changes proposed.

Support

Representation ID: 2039

Received: 05/08/2011

Strongly support the first paragraph and criterions 1&2 of policy. Southern Water look to HBC to impose planning conditions to require developers to connect off-site at the nearest point, if the local sewerage system has insufficient capacity.

Any developer contributions are negotiated directly between Southern Water and the developer.

Suggest inclusion of additional policy - Protection of amenity and utility infrastructure.

Comment

Representation ID: 2040

Received: 05/08/2011

Additonal policy required - Protection of amenity and infrastructure: Development proposals that would have a negative impact on the operation of sites and premises currently used for the provision of utility infrastructure will be resisted, unless evidence is presented to demonstrate that the sites are no longer required.

Development proposals in proximity to existing wastewater facilities will only be permitted if there is no unacceptable impact on the amenity of future occupants. The distance between the infrastructure and the development must be sufficient to allow adequate odour dispersion.

Support

Representation ID: 2055

Received: 08/08/2011

Agree

Comment

Representation ID: 2092

Received: 08/08/2011

The reference to future supplementary guidance being appropriate is noted. Close liaison on this would be welcomed, to ensure that due attention is given to the provision of strategic infrastructure, including transport and green space.