Paper 2: Strategic Growth and Spatial Distribution Options

Yes

Representation ID: 27368

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

Growth Option 5 looks to achieve significantly higher levels of growth than has been taking place historically within Conwy. However it is essential that the RLDP is able to deliver the required level of housing and employment growth which not only meets the needs going forward but also considers the significant shortfall that the Council currently have. As such a further growth option which seeks to provide a higher level of growth than Option 4 but not as high as Option 5 would be supported.

Noted.

Yes

Representation ID: 27369

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

This will direct development in line with the WSP to Primary Key Settlements and Satellite Settlements with the capacity and infrastructure to accommodate development. It acknowledges that in the rural area a more refined policy approach would be developed to ensure that a more flexible approach is taken to bringing about delivering local needs whilst protecting local character and the open countryside. By focusing on this wider growth option, it ensures the role of other sustainable settlements are not overlooked. Likely to have less impact on the capacity of infrastructure and on a wide range of physical and environmental constraints.

Noted.

No

Representation ID: 27370

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

This scores poorly against a large number of the sustainability appraisal objectives, the location of some employment and land allocations distributed across the hierarchy are constrained in some rural areas and to the east of the County. Coupled with the fact that national guidance seeks to locate housing and employment in close proximity to assist sustainability, it is considered that the current LDP strategy is not best placed to deliver wider strategies. If progressed, this could result in spreading growth too thinly as the proportional distribution gives the impression that most settlements will need to grow or have an allocation.

Noted.

No

Representation ID: 27371

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

The key weakness of Option 2 is that it only focuses growth on the urban areas within the settlement hierarchy, which tend to be the most sustainable locations to accommodate growth. There will be rural settlements lower down in the settlement hierarchy that are in sustainable locations that would be denied growth under this option as it would see growth spread around the most urban settlements irrespective of where evidence suggests demand is located.

Noted.

No

Representation ID: 27372

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

Option 3 does not focus any growth within sustainable rural settlements and locations and if progressed could place pressure on infrastructure if growth is too tightly focused. Unconstrained and sustainable settlements outside the higher tiers would be prevented from contributing to some growth.

Noted.

No

Representation ID: 27373

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

Scores positively in the majority of sustainability appraisal objectives and would be suited to all of the settlement hierarchy options. However focusing growth on transport hubs and corridors would have mixed results. Growth would be focused within the sustainable locations, however further development along the A470 and A5 could encourage greater car use. This option would also result in additional development pressure on those settlements along transport corridors and strategic hubs, which may not be suitable. This option is also not considered to have a sufficient level of flexibility to withstand unforeseen circumstances and limited mechanisms to promote brownfield land.

Noted.

No

Representation ID: 27374

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

Does not score positively within any of the sustainability appraisal objectives. It would be inflexible to changes in circumstance and have limited mechanisms to promote brownfield land. The Council has a severe shortfall in its 5 year housing supply, and the allocation of a new settlement of 1000 dwellings would go some way to meet the shortfall. However, there are significant time delays associated with progressing a new settlement that could result in the creation of a further shortfall of development over the plan period and it is unlikely that all dwellings would be built out within the plan period.

Noted.

Yes

Representation ID: 27375

Received: 25/01/2019

Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited

Agent: Axis

It is considered that a hybrid option could be the best option to progress.

We are of the view that option 4 is the most suitable spatial distribution option, however, a hybrid option which reflects the settlement hierarchy set out in settlement hierarchy options 3 and 5 would also seek to deliver sustainable growth, this would ensure that the majority of growth occurs within the top tier urban settlements which are best suited to accommodate further growth, whilst still allowing for a moderate level of growth within the most sustainable rural settlements where it can meet a recognised need.

Noted.