Preferred Options 2025

Yes

Representation ID: 99043

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

Yes, we support the approach identified in Policy Direction 13. Stoneleigh Park is identified as a Major Investment Site within the Core Employment Area. We fully support this area being the focus for new employment development.

No

Representation ID: 99047

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

No, the extent of the Stoneleigh Park Major Investment Site (MIS 6) should be extended to include the Kingswood Business Park adjacent to the A46 as detailed in our Call for Sites submission. It should reflect the extent of Strategic Growth Location SG02 – Stoneleigh Park Employment Group.

Yes

Representation ID: 99050

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

Yes, we support this approach. It should be noted that the SG02 – Stoneleigh Park Employment Group development opportunity proposed through the Call for Sites submission includes a large area of renewable energy generation. This is a significant advantage of the proposed development.

Yes

Representation ID: 99062

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

Yes, there is demand for business units of a variety of sizes across the plan area. It should be noted that Stoneleigh Park is capable of providing a variety of different building types and sizes. Indeed, Stoneleigh Park includes a number of existing buildings that could be re-purposed or reused to help support economic growth. These can be supported by large scale employment development on the Kingswood Business Park next to the A46 junction.

No

Representation ID: 99065

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

No, one of the key issues underpinning renewable energy generation is the availability of a grid connection. The fact that the site is previously developed, or low quality agricultural land, will have no impact on the delivery of the scheme if there is not a viable grid connection available. The policy should recognise this.

The policy should specifically support renewable energy generation schemes provided alongside new development. For example, Call for Sites submission in respect of SG02 – Stoneleigh Park Employment Group includes a large area of renewable energy generation that can help offset the energy requirements of the development.

Yes

Representation ID: 99076

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

We support the reference in the policy to the Councils encouraging the use and development of decentralised energy systems with large scale development. However, this should also be a key matter in the selection of development allocations. Priority should be given to those sites that can incorporate large scale renewable energy provision in determining which employment sites should be included within the Plan.

As referred to in our Call for Sites submission in relation to SG02 – Stoneleigh Park Employment Group, the Stoneleigh Park and Kingswood Business Park proposal incorporates a large area dedicated to renewable energy generation.

No

Representation ID: 99209

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

Whilst we have no specific objection to the preparation of Design Codes they must be prepared in conjunction with site promoters. This is essential for the Design Code to be effective. In addition, the Design Codes must be flexible given the length of plan period. The Design Codes should not act as an obstacle to sustainable and suitable development on allocated sites

Other

Representation ID: 99210

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

Whilst we support Draft Policy Direction 31 its approach should also be adopted in the selection of potential development sites in the SWLP.

Other

Representation ID: 99213

Received: 06/03/2025

Respondent: MPTL

Agent: Harris Lamb

The policy makes a reference to the potential requirement for in excess of 10% BNG. This has the potential undermine the viability of sites. BNG is a significant development cost both financial and in terms of land take. It is essential that any policy of this nature are viability tested