The plan talks a lot about attracting high quality employment in the professional, scientific, technical and industrial sectors to Lichfield and how this will achieve an objective of reducing residents' commute time. We agree with this, but feel that further consideration should be given to ensure sufficient land is allocated for the businesses providing these types of employment. This point should be included in the "Preferred Policy Direction" section.
Some of the land allocated for employment purposes will be for SME/startup businesses e.g., Cricket Lane. Again we support this, but sufficient land should also be allocated for larger employers.
We know that there are essentially only two large employers in Lichfield city (Police Mutual and LDC) and if we could attract two or three more, this would be game-changing for Lichfield (by providing local employment, in turn good for the local economy, and bringing increased revenue in the form of business rates to LDC.
This also links into the LCC Neighbourhood Plan which focuses on Lichfield economy/employment.
We know that leisure is under provided in Lichfield. LDC has committed in October 2019 to provide a new publicly funded leisure centre in five years' time. Land options should be provided for this in local plan, and the Preferred Policy section should specifically refer to LDC's commitment to build this new leisure facility within five years.
The report identifies the lack of public infrastructure as the population of Lichfield grows, e.g., new secondary school and GP facilities. Land for these needs to be allocated. We would suggest that specific reference is made in the Preferred Policy section below 16.16, that a consideration with all planning permissions for residential housing must be the sufficiency in the relevant part of the district of school places and access to GP facilities.
Similarly with the granting of planning permission for residential housing close to neighbouring districts, e.g., to the north of Tamworth, detailed consideration must be taken of the impact on public services and infrastructure in that neighbouring district.
At 14.33 and the "preferred policy direction" section below 14.36, we do need a better mix of tenures with the new housing, i.e., not just for private sale, but in particular social and affordable rent via housing associations
Section 14.34 refers to the 40% affordable housing target being aspirational. LDC just doesn't hit this because developers put the council under pressure ("we can't make sufficient margin if AFH is 40% and so we can't commence the development"). There should be a hardwired minimum AFH requirement (we suggest 35%) below which LDC cannot go when granting planning permission on the larger developments where AFH must be provided. This point should be made in response to Question 10 below 14.36.
The environmental agenda - specific plans to deal with climate change issues are limited.
The city needs to provide sufficient EV charging points. The plan also importantly refers to energy conservation/efficiency measures in connection with property development and a specific target should be set for this. This point should be made in response to question 4 below 11.9.
Section 11.20 refers to locally produced energy e.g., by wind turbines and biomass and talks generally about how much local electricity these could produce. There should be specific targets set. This point should be made in response to question 5 below 11.23.
The Preferred Policy section relating to the Lichfield economy below 15.21 says that "within the primaryfrontages, any changes of use applications from retail to other non-retail uses will be resisted where it would undermine the vitality and viability of the city centre.". That seems too restrictive at a time when
city/town centres need to reinvent themselves for example with more leisure and office facilities and residential housing. We suggest that that is removed. (21 is also relevant here)
Lichfield city centre is one of the more lively and prosperous in the area , but city economies are changing as more and more of the retail market moves from bricks and mortar to online shopping, and from city centres to out-of-town retail parks. We welcome a reinvention of the concept of the urban centre which keeps these alive and vibrant with a mix of uses.
What do you think?
Printed (hosted) by Prater Raines Ltd, 98 Sandgate High Street, Folkestone CT20 3BY
Promoted & Published for Lichfield, Tamworth and Burton Liberal Democrats candidates by K LePla 148 Chesterfield Road, Lichfield WS14 0AA
The views expressed are those of the publisher, not of the service provider.
Website designed and developed by Prater Raines Ltd