Policy CL1(i) rewrite as: “To resist the demolition of, inappropriate alterations and extensions to and change of use of artists’ studios.” Design Quality Para 34.3.14, lines 4/5: It is not clear of It is what “ease movement” means. unclear whether it is about relative accessibility or access. Para 34.3.15 actually refers to Policy CL2 does not clarify this other than referring to “accessibility”. accessible to which is about access. “inclusive – all” Para 34.3.18: This is where the relationship to adjoining buildings and the role of conservation area appraisal documents should be dealt with. Proposal: Line 2, after first sentence add: should include drawings that accurately show the design “Applications relationship of new development with its neighbours.” Line conservation area 4: After “Supplementary Planning Documents” add “, appraisal documents” Eyesores: Para 34.3.18 and Policy CL2(c): The Society considers this policy unsound as the definition of an eyesore is not objectively defined and more promises “a in order to encourage redevelopment. This approach would flexible approach” put the Council in a weak bargaining position by suggesting that policies would be relaxed. ; Proposal: Delete Para 34.3.18 and Policy CL2(c). CL3: Heritage Assets Conservation Areas and Historic Places – Para 34.3.24: Line to majority 1: Change “the majority” “about three-quarters” – means more than 50% only. Nearly three-quarters of the Borough is covered by conservation areas. Para 34.3.24: First two sentences are policy, but this is not conveyed in Policy CL3. These are sentences must be translated into a policy. If not the policy is not sound.
Policy CL1(i) rewrite as: “To resist the demolition of, inappropriate alterations and extensions to and change of use of artists’ studios.” Design Quality Para 34.3.14, lines 4/5: It is not clear what “ease of movement” means. It is unclear whether it is about relative accessibility or access. Para 34.3.15 actually refers to “accessibility”. Policy CL2 does not clarify this other than referring to “inclusive – accessible to all” which is about access. Para 34.3.18: This is where the relationship to adjoining buildings and the role of conservation area appraisal documents should be dealt with. Proposal: Line 2, after first sentence add: “Applications should include drawings that accurately show the design relationship of new development with its neighbours.” Line 4: After “Supplementary Planning Documents” add “, conservation area appraisal documents” Eyesores: Para 34.3.18 and Policy CL2(c): The Society considers this policy unsound as the definition of an eyesore is not objectively defined and promises “a more flexible approach” in order to encourage redevelopment. This approach would put the Council in a weak bargaining position by suggesting that policies would be relaxed. ; Proposal: Delete Para 34.3.18 and Policy CL2(c). CL3: Heritage Assets – Conservation Areas and Historic Places Para 34.3.24: Line 1: Change “the majority” to “about three-quarters” – majority means more than 50% only. Nearly three-quarters of the Borough is covered by conservation areas. Para 34.3.24: First two sentences are policy, but this is not conveyed in Policy CL3. These are sentences must be translated into a policy. If not the policy is not sound.