South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18)
List Comments
7 comments.
Respondent | Response Date | Details |
---|---|---|
Tatworth and Forton Parish Council | 17 Oct 2019 | South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Distribution of Housing Growth Text Block
Housing growth
The housing requirement for South Somerset has been identified as least 14,322 dwellings in the plan period 2016 to 2036. Whilst it is recognised that population in the South West is increasing, mainly due to people over 60 relocating, this document does not properly explain the requirement for so much additional housing.
|
Home Builders Federation (S Green) | 18 Sep 2019 | South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Distribution of Housing Growth Text Block
Housing Land Supply (HLS)
As set out in the 2019 NPPF the strategic policies of the LPR should provide a clear strategy to bring sufficient land forward and at a sufficient rate to address housing needs over the plan period by planning for and allocating sufficient sites to deliver strategic priorities (para 23). The policies of the LPR should identify a supply of specific deliverable sites for years 1 – 5 of the plan period and specific developable sites or broad locations for growth for years
|
West Coker Parish Council | 18 Sep 2019 | South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Distribution of Housing Growth Text Block
There is no mention of the Housing and Employment Land Availability Assessment (HEELA) of South Somerset. The HELAA is relevant to identifying the growth potential of the area and should be included in the Local Plan.
|
Curry rivel | 18 Sep 2019 | South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Distribution of Housing Growth Text Block
Curry Rivel Parish Council completely rejects the statement in 5.8 that CR is a sustainable area for development. Why?
In the context of recognition of a climate emergency the policy would result in CR becoming a dormitory village increasing carbon emissions . Why would CR become a dormitory village? SSDC's data on employment opportunities highlights the Langport area as an area of low possibilities of employment. This is because transport links are so poor. These new entrants to CR would trave
|
«anonymous» | 18 Sep 2019 | South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Distribution of Housing Growth Text Block
The suggestion that the spatial strategy should
be amended to less sustainable locations
because of the acknowledged challenge of
planning larger developments seems to be a
rather defeatist strategy.
It would have been better if more planning
resources were deployed in and a higher priority
given to dealing with the applications for the
YUE's, one of which was validated June 2014 !
Why discuss the need for reserve sites when the
"allocated ones" are not duly processed ?
|
K&P Davis | 16 Sep 2019 | South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Distribution of Housing Growth Text Block
1.3 lower proportion of the overall growth being directed towards Yeovil section 5.39
Section 5.39 states "The rate of delivery of new homes in Yeovil has been identified as an issue in terms of maintaining a constant supply of new homes. This is largely due to the fact that large urban extensions take longer to masterplan and advance through the planning application process resulting in delays in delivery. As a way of addressing this, the Local Plan Review sees a lower proportion of the overal
|
Barry James PHSW | 16 Aug 2019 | South Somerset Local Plan Review 2016-2036 Preferred Options Consultation (Regulation 18) Settlement Strategy Distribution of Housing Growth Text Block
The approach described in paragraphs 5.38 to 5.42 is sensible and refers to
relevant evidence upon which the approach is based. A mixture of large urban
extensions and a wider range of (relatively) smaller sites is endorsed as a logical
way to plan housing development in the Plan area. The Council must keep in
mind the need to ensure that there is sufficient flexibility and therefore sufficient
sites and proactive policies that will facilitate development as a core element of
the Plan. Giv
|