Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Support

Representation ID: 2639

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Support policy.

Support

Representation ID: 2640

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Support policy.

Support

Representation ID: 2641

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Support policy.

Support

Representation ID: 2642

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Support policy.

Support

Representation ID: 2643

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Support policy.

Support

Representation ID: 2644

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Support policy.

Support

Representation ID: 2645

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Support policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 2646

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Support vision but not a sufficiently proactive approach to promoting new devt. Need clear strategy set out potential infrastructure improvements required to facilitate resi-led devt.

Devt E of S'bourne could deliver new transport improvements.

Cap of 1250 figure not justified, at odds with minimum figure set out in LPR - E of S'bourne could deliver much higher figure.

Should be more guidance for NP given such significant level of devt proposed - e.g.broad area of search identifying land E of Southbourne

Comment

Representation ID: 2647

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

Concern that mix too detailed - should reflect local housing need

Support

Representation ID: 2648

Received: 05/02/2019

Respondent: Barton Willmore

We are supportive of the approach that a minimum density for new development is provided. This should however be considered in view of the character of the area to ensure development is of an appropriate scale.