Comment ID 1157
Document Section Proposed Submission Local Plan 2006-2028 Settlement Strategy Distribution of Housing Growth Market Deliverability Market Deliverability Policy SS5: Delivering New Housing Growth View all on this section
Respondent Perrin Construction Ltd View all by this respondent
Agent Bell Cornwell (J Terry)
Response Date 10 Aug 2012
Do you consider the DPD is Legally Compliant? No
Do you consider the DPD is Sound? No
If you have responded that the DPD is unsound, Do you consider the DPD is unsound because it is:
  • Not Consistent with national policy

Objection is made to the inclusion of sites ‘Allocated (but without permission)’:

Tables 4 and 5 and Policy SS5 identify the residual number of dwellings to be allocated within the new Local Plan. Reference is made to 53 dwellings which are ‘allocated (but without permission). It is not clear as to what this refers to. If they are existing allocations which have not yet gained planning permission, then there is a significant question as to whether they are deliverable and developable as defined by NPPF paragraph 47, footnotes 11 and 12 and as such should not just be rolled forward but reviewed.

What changes do you suggest to make the DPD legally compliant or sound? Table 4: Reference to ‘53 dwellings which are allocated (but without permission) should be deleted and the Residual Housing Requirement amended to 158 in line with Table 5.

Policy SS5: Reference to ‘105 Additional Housing Provision Required’ should be amended to 158 in line with revised Table 4 and Table 5.
If your representation is seeking a change, do you consider it necessary to participate at the oral part of the examination? Yes
If you wish to participate at the oral part of the examination, please outline why you consider this to be necessary: In order that this central issue can be adequately considered.