Comment ID 96
Document Section Proposed Submission Local Plan 2006-2028 Environmental Quality Historic Environment Policy EQ3: Historic Environment View all on this section
Respondent Bourne Leisure Ltd View all by this respondent
Agent Nathaniel Lichfield and Partne…
Response Date 20 Jul 2012
Do you consider the DPD is Legally Compliant?
Do you consider the DPD is Sound?
If you have responded that the DPD is unsound, Do you consider the DPD is unsound because it is:

Bourne Leisure supports the recognition by South Somerset District Council in paragraph 12.37 that:

"The historic environment is a valuable part of South Somerset's cultural heritage and contributes significantly to the local economy and identity of the district, adding to the quality of life and well- being of residents and visitors.. . "

Whilst paragraph 12.39 continues by stating, 'I... The District Council is committed to protecting and where appropriate enhancing this irreplaceable heritage", the paragraph also makes clear that the Council will protect these assets from inappropriate development. Bourne Leisure considers that additional wording should be incorporated into this paragraph, to provide clarification on the benefits of enhancing heritage assets and the necessity to do so for viability reasons - in many cases, this is the key reason for the regeneration and improvement of heritage assets.

Additional wording should reflect the chapter on tourism and in particular paragraphs 8.68 and 8.69, and Policy EP8. This chapter makes reference to heritage assets as well as the importance of sustaining viability of (tourism) facilities through their enhancement. To ensure that the Local Plan is sound and effective in its implementation, its policies should be more closely interrelated and their supporting text should provide consistency throughout the document.

Policy EQ3 should also better reflect the supporting text in paragraph 12.39 and Policy EP8.

What changes do you suggest to make the DPD legally compliant or sound? Bourne Leisure suggests that as per the opening sentence of Policy EP8, Policy EQ3 should read:

"In order to sustain the vitality and viability of the historic environment in the District, new and enhanced development proposals will be expected to:.."

This revised wording would place more emphasis on the enhancement of existing facilities to support their future maintenance, and better reflect the key viability issues relating to development of historic assets.
If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate at the oral part of the examination?
If you wish to participate at the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary: