New Local Plan Options

Search Representations

Results for Hft search

New search New search

Object

New Local Plan Options

Q1. Do you have any comments on the Draft Vision?

Representation ID: 3204

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

While we support the draft Local Plan Vision in principle, we believe that the new Local Plan draft has failed to adequately address the issue of Previously Developed Land in the countryside. The reuse of such land is supported by, and is in fact a core principle of, the NPPF (Paragraph 17). As such, these sites should be prioritised as a means to meet local and District wide housing needs. For more information, please refer to attached letter.

Object

New Local Plan Options

Q2. Do you have any comments on the Draft Objectives, or any additional objectives to suggest?

Representation ID: 3240

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

We believe that Objective 1: Housing and Objective 3: Location of Development provide a proactive approach to addressing the increased housing needs pressure facing the District. Objective 3 supports the reuse of previously developed land in line with Paragraph 17 of the NPPF; however, we are concerned that the remainder of the Draft Local Plan fails to adequately support (or make reference to) this policy objective. The current drafting of both the countryside policies and the housing policies does not recognise the contribution that PDL should make to housing delivery in the District. Please refer to attached letter.

Object

New Local Plan Options

Harborough's Settlement Hierarchy

Representation ID: 3248

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

This section of the plan fails to recognise the status of PDL in the countryside and the role it has in delivering some housing provision in the countryside. The policy context as proposed, which is limited to the conversion or subdivision of existing appropriate buildings in the countryside, does not meet the proposed new Local Plan Objective 3: Location of Development aims and is also contrary to the requirement set out in the NPPF to promote the re-use of PDL.

Support

New Local Plan Options

Option 1: Rural

Representation ID: 3254

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

We support Option 1: Rural where 60% of the District's housing needs will be met in the urban settlements with 40% met by rural settlements (rural centres and selected rural villages). However, we note that this policy fails to make reference to PDL sites (such as our Client's land at Shangton). Such sites can deliver sustainable housing growth by reusing PDL, thus reducing pressure on other settlements in rural areas and wider greenfield release to deliver housing growth. Please refer to attached letter for more information.

Support

New Local Plan Options

Q5. Which is your preferred Option for Development in the Countryside?

Representation ID: 3257

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

Preferred option is Option C2: Limited infill and Development Management Led. See comments on C2 Option for details.

Object

New Local Plan Options

Option C1: Strictly controlling development in the countryside

Representation ID: 3260

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

We object to Option C1 being taken forward as part of the Local Plan. Option C1 restricts development in the countryside, limiting it to only agricultural and similar activities. In order to meet housing need and to satisfy the vision and objectives in the new Local Plan, which states in Paragraph 83 that: 'there must be a shift in the mentality towards development in the countryside as more housing is needed', the new Local Plan must provide a positive planning policy context for the redevelopment of PDL sites in the countryside to ensure that they can accommodate housing growth.

Support

New Local Plan Options

Option C2: Limited infill and Development Management led

Representation ID: 3264

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

We support Option C2 in principle, as it represents a more balanced approach to development. However, we believe that the current drafting of this policy does not adequately address the reuse of PDL sites which should contribute to the District's housing land supply. If explicit reference to countryside PDL were included within the policy, this would support Local Plan Objective 3 as well as being in line national planning policy (Paragraphs 17 & 87 of the NPPF).

Object

New Local Plan Options

Option C3: Meeting locally identified need (with Option C1 above)

Representation ID: 3266

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

This option would allow for the provision of some housing in smaller settlements such as Shangton where development needs are identified locally either through a housing needs survey or through a Neighbourhood Plan. This option therefore does not recognise the potential to reuse PDL sites in the future and hence this must be included if this option is carried forward in the future, to ensure that the Local Plan is in line with the NPPF.

Object

New Local Plan Options

Option C3: Meeting locally identified need (with Option C2 above)

Representation ID: 3267

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

This option would allow for the provision of some housing in smaller settlements such as Shangton where development needs are identified locally either through a housing needs survey or through a Neighbourhood Plan. This option therefore does not recognise the potential to reuse PDL sites in the future and hence this must be included if this option is carried forward in the future, to ensure that the Local Plan is in line with the NPPF.

Object

New Local Plan Options

Proposed approach

Representation ID: 3270

Received: 30/10/2015

Respondent: Hft

Agent: Mr. Nigel Simkin

Representation Summary:

We support the statement that a 'realistic approach' must be taken when considering affordable housing. However we believe that the Local Plan must be explicit in what this means, and in the approach to considering what makes a development viable.

The affordable housing policy should include recognition that affordable housing will be sought on the most sustainably located sites, to ensure that future residents have access to the facilities, services and jobs they need without being reliant on a car. Sites which do not meet this test should be subject to an offsite contribution for provision of the affordable housing.

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.