Southbourne Allocation Development Plan Document - Regulation 19 Consultation

Comment

Representation ID: 7971

Received: 17/07/2026

Respondent: Wates Developments

Agent: Turley

Policy A13 of the CLP requires provision of a specific number of Gypsy and Traveller pitches and a serviced site(s) for Travelling Showpeople, in accordance with Policy H11.
Policy SA1 (second paragraph) references Policy A13 for the avoidance of duplication, before setting out additional provisions to be included in the masterplan for this site. One of these (criterion e), includes provision for Travelling Showpeople plots. Whilst it is assumed that is not over and above the requirements already set out in policy A13, it creates ambiguity, which may undermine how effective the policy is at development management stage.

Comment

Representation ID: 7972

Received: 17/07/2026

Respondent: Wates Developments

Agent: Turley

The requirement that future sites be delivered "without ransom strips" is not a planning matter and therefore we recommend that this is removed from the policy. Ransom strips relate to private land ownership and legal interests rather than the use and development of land, and their inclusion introduced a non-planning consideration into the policy framework.

Comment

Representation ID: 7973

Received: 17/07/2026

Respondent: Wates Developments

Agent: Turley

Paragraph 5.45 currently requires provision of a 2.5km walking loop. However, Natural England's established SANG guidance, (Appendix 1, page 6, second criterion) confirms this should be expressed as a range between 2.3-2.5km.
Allowing for a range would help ensure the policy is justified and effective from the point of adoption.

Comment

Representation ID: 7974

Received: 17/07/2026

Respondent: Wates Developments

Agent: Turley

Support the design-led approach to density and the principle of varying densities across the site to respond to accessibility, character and landscape sensitivities. Average density of "around 35dph" is considered unnecessarily restrictive and potentially inconsistent with the objective of making effective use of land in line with Paragraph 129 of the NPPF.
Given the sustainable location of the site, context and uses provided, an average density of around 40 dwellings per hectare would be more appropriate and would remain consistent with the proposed density range of approximately 20-50+dph and ensure efficient land use in line with national policy.

Comment

Representation ID: 7976

Received: 17/07/2026

Respondent: Wates Developments

Agent: Turley

IDP, site allocation policy and viability assessment do not appear to be fully aligned in terms of the infrastructure requirements identified and the assumed funding responsibilities. Greater clarity required regarding which infrastructure items are expected to be funded and delivered by developers, which will be funded through strategic funding mechanisms or infrastructure providers, and how costs have been reflected within the viability assessment. This would provide certainty to developers, ensure consistency across the evidence base and policy framework, and assist in demonstrating the deliverability of the allocation.