Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035

Comment

Representation ID: 2585

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

Welcome approach to SOCG - need to be made publicly available before LP is published for pre-submission consultation (para 27 NPPF)

Comment

Representation ID: 2586

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

Final bullet 2.4 not consistent with para 6.91

Support

Representation ID: 2587

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

Support approach however no trajectory provided - requirement of para 73 of NPPF

Comment

Representation ID: 2588

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

Proposed affordable housing target has not been viability tested therefore uncertain as to whether it will prove to be achievable.

Support

Representation ID: 2589

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

Support para 4.63, however table following para 4.65 misleading as defines Tangmere as 'village centre'

Comment

Representation ID: 2590

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

Policy unhelpful in application to Tangmere where there is a close proposal for transition of Tangmere village centre to local centre

Comment

Representation ID: 2591

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

The second paragraph within Policy S10 refers to "town centre uses". It is recommended that this is revised to "main town centre uses" to be consistent with the terminology used within the NPPF and within Policy S9.
The final paragraph within Policy S10 states: "Other uses will be granted where it has been demonstrated that all the following criteria have been met:"
This is ambiguous and it would benefit from additional clarity to confirm that the policy here is referringto proposals for a change of use at existing retail premises.

Support

Representation ID: 2592

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

Broadly supported but developer contributions yet to be subject to viability testing.
Important to understand potential viability impacts of S106 obligations on scheme deliverability esp as in addition to other policy/contribution requirements.

Comment

Representation ID: 2593

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

Criterion 4 - laudable but should be recognised not always achievable in practice - provide further guidance.

Final part of policy - insert new bullet (between first and second) to indicate that CDC will work with the applicant to explore/agree alternative forms of infrastructure that would address identified viability concern.

Comment

Representation ID: 2594

Received: 07/02/2019

Respondent: Countryside Properties

Agent: Turley

The ninth line of paragraph 5.3 should be worded: "...establish or maintain a strong sense of place..."