Preferred Options 2025
Search representations
Results for Hayfield Homes search
New searchNo
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction –39- Environmental Net Gain?
Representation ID: 108556
Received: 29/06/2025
Respondent: Hayfield Homes
It is considered that provisions relating to Environmental Net Gain would cause unnecessary confusion in the context of the mandatory BNG requirements. It is considered that such a policy would not be justified, and Policy Direction 39 should be deleted.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-40 Green and Blue Infrastructure?
Representation ID: 108557
Received: 29/06/2025
Respondent: Hayfield Homes
It is considered that the proposed requirement to produce a “Greening Factor” for an area is unduly onerous and should be deleted from Policy Direction 40.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-46- Protecting the Cotswold National Landscape?
Representation ID: 108558
Received: 29/06/2025
Respondent: Hayfield Homes
Hayfield strongly disagree with the proposed buffer to the Cotswold National Landscape. The inclusion of a buffer around the periphery of the Cotswold National Landscape would not be consistent with the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF), as is required of Local Plans. A National Landscape relates to land that is protected to conserve and enhance its natural beauty. It would therefore not be appropriate or justified for undesignated land to be afforded the same level of protection as a National Landscape.
No
Preferred Options 2025
Do you agree with the approach laid out in Draft Policy Direction-49- Agricultural Land?
Representation ID: 108559
Received: 29/06/2025
Respondent: Hayfield Homes
Hayfield consider that a local policy relating to agricultural land is not necessary, as this is already provided for within the NPPF, and would result in repetition of national policy
