Tur Langton Neighbourhood Plan Pre submission consultation responses No Chapter / Policy Respondent Comment Response Amendment Section Number 1 7B H3 Anglian Anglian Water is supportive of the requirement for developments Noted None Built Building Water in the Parish to incorporate Sustainable Drainage Systems Environment Design (SuDS). The use of SuDS would help to reduce the risk of Principles surface water and sewer flooding. 2 7C ENV 1 Anglian Sites 417 and 418: There are existing sewers in the ownership of The policy rules out Natural and Protection Water Anglian Water within the boundaries of these designated local development in the Historic of Local green spaces. designated areas Environment Green other than in ‘very Spaces It is therefore suggested that Policy ENV 1 should be amended to special include reference to the circumstances in which development circumstances’. It will would be permitted in the designated local green spaces included be up to the applicant utility infrastructure provided by Anglian Water in any planning application to demonstrate that the circumstances are ‘special’. 3 7C ENV 9 Anglian Anglian Water is supportive of the requirement for developments Noted None Natural and Rivers water in the Parish to incorporate Sustainable Drainage Systems Historic and (SuDS) into the design of new developments. The use of SuDS Enviroment Flooding would help to reduce the risk of surface water and sewer flooding. 4 General Natural Natural England does not have any specific comments on this Noted None England draft neighbourhood plan. However, we refer you to the attached annex which covers the issues and opportunities that should be considered when preparing a Neighbourhood Plan. Best and Most Versatile Agricultural Land We have not checked the agricultural land classification of the proposed allocations, but we advise you ensure that any allocations on best and most versatile land are justified in line with para 112 of the National Planning Policy Framework. Page 1 of 47 No Chapter / Policy Respondent Comment Response Amendment Section Number 5 General Historic Your Neighbourhood Plan falls within Tur Langton conservation Noted. The None England area and includes a number of designated heritage assets conservation area is including 1 GII* listed building, 15 GII listed buildings and 2 covered by national scheduled ancient monuments. It will be important that the planning policies and strategy you put together for this area safeguards those elements through HDC’s Core which contribute to the importance of those historic assets. This Strategy. will assist in ensuring they can be enjoyed by future generations of the area and make sure it is in line with national planning policy. The conservation officer at Harborough District Council is the best placed person to assist you in the development of your Neighbourhood Plan They can help you to consider how the strategy might address the area’s heritage assets. At this point we don’t consider there is a need for Historic England to be involved in the development of the strategy for your area. If you have not already done so, we would recommend that you speak to the staff at Leicestershire County Council who look after the Historic Environment Record and give advice on archaeological matters. They should be able to provide details of not only any designated heritage assets but also locally-important buildings, archaeological remains and landscapes. Some Historic Environment Records may also be available on-line via the Heritage Gateway (www.heritagegateway.org.uk <http://www.heritagegateway.org.uk>). It may also be useful to involve local voluntary groups such as the local Civic Society, local history groups, building preservation trusts, etc. in the production of your Neighbourhood Plan. Your local authority might also be able to provide you with general support in the production of your Neighbourhood Plan. National Planning Practice Guidance is clear that where it is relevant, Neighbourhood Plans need to include enough information about local heritage to guide planning decisions and to put broader strategic heritage policies from the local authority’s local plan into action at a neighbourhood scale. If appropriate this should include enough information about local non-designated heritage assets including sites of archaeological interest to guide decisions. Page 2 of 47 No Chapter / Policy Respondent Comment Response Amendment Section Number Further information and guidance on how heritage can best be incorporated into Neighbourhood Plans has been produced by Historic England. This signposts a number of other documents which your community might find useful in helping to identify what it is about your area which makes it distinctive and how you might go about ensuring that the character of the area is retained. These can be found at:- http://www.historicengland.org.uk/advice/planning/plan- making/improve-yourneighbourhood/ 6 Page 38, ENV3 A resident We do not consider the tree at the entrance to Buckey Lane (near Thank you for this New policy to Paragraph Important our house) to be of aboricultural and landscape significance comment. We have say ‘Trees 11, Map 7A woodland, because it has the disease of miner which is now very apparent, it amended the policy to and trees and has appeared earlier this year. When the leaves fall we have to remove the hedgerows of hedges clear them up although the tree is not on our land. Throughout description of good the year, especially in spring, our vehicles (which are parked in ‘significance’ this and arboricultural, front of our house) are covered in sticky deposit and muck from other trees, in favour biodiversity the tree and birds who roost in it, thus costing us money to have of a tree survey and amenity them continually cleaned. The telegraph wires go through it and needing to be value should could be brought down at any time. In our opinion a tree growing undertaken prior to be protected to the size it now is should never have been planted so close to development activity. from loss or the road. damage as a result of development. Wherever possible, they should be integrated into the design of development proposals and their enhancement will be supported. Proposals Page 3 of 47 No Chapter / Policy Respondent Comment Response Amendment Section Number should be accompanied by a tree survey of at least (currently) BS5837 standard, or the standard in force at the time, that establishes the health and longevity of any affected trees’. 7 General A resident The detail on the maps are too small, it is difficult to figure some Thank you for pointing High of them out even with a magnifying glass. It would be better if this out. We will make resolution they were all the same size as the map on page 28 sure that high maps to be resolution maps are provided available in the Submission version of the NP 8 Section 7, A landowner We understand the limits of development, illustrated with the red Thank you. The limits None Page 23 line on page 23 depicts the garden boundary. We believe this is to development have mis-represented for the houses on Shangton Road, who utilise been set based on a land outside this red line as their garden. As such we propose the methodology that has red line is changed to the blue line in the attached photo been applied (see below) consistently. The revised LtD follows defined boundaries, and amending it as suggested to include paddocks and non- garden areas which Page 4 of 47 No Chapter / Policy Respondent Comment Response Amendment Section Number relate better to the countryside would have a detrimental impact across the built-up area of the parish. 9 General A landowner Reads well Thank you. None 10 7A S2 A resident I happened to go onto the village website on the evening of Thank you for this Limits to Strategy Limits to Wednesday 21st June and spotted the draft plan. I am strongly comment. Development Dev opposed to the proposed plan as affects our border which extends revised as the limit of development from the south west corner of our plot in a On undertaking a proposed. diagonal line across the field. We were completely in the dark review of the Limits to about the proposal within the draft Village Plan to change the line Development and the of development to the significant detriment to ourselves. The potential location of health challenges both my wife and I face meant we were unable housing sites, the to attend the two briefing sessions that were held. Unfortunately Parish Council has no-one had informed us about the proposed change which has agreed to remove this such a significant effect on us. potential site from the Neighbourhood Plan My comments are as follows: and the Limits to Development will be The map within the draft Village Plan is based upon a long out of redrawn accordingly. date map concerning Carlton Cottage. Significant additions were made in 2000 of a granny annex which extends both to the west and east to the rear of the property, and a double garage situated roughly halfway between the house and the north end of the plot. A key feature and amenity of our property are the unfettered views both to the south and to north looking up to Carlton Clump. There is Restrictive Covenant still in place dated 15 December 1992 “to erect a post and four rail motorway style fence”. Improvements and development to our property have therefore all been made with the openness and views in mind. There are 6 sets of windows along the west side of the property including as part of a conservatory. All are relatively close to the border, at Page 5 of 47 No Chapter / Policy Respondent Comment Response Amendment Section Number one point as little as four or five feet from the fence.