Object

Representation ID: 65531

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Sharba Homes Group

Agent: PJPlanning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

This policy puts unecessary obsticles in the way pof housing delivery contrary to the NPPF (paras 14, 47 and 154).

The first bullet point places unnecessary weight on the opinions of the stakeholders, transforming a material consideration into a development
plan policy where development may be stifled simply because it may
be seen as unwanted or unnecessary, for reasons contrary to other
aims and ambitions of the plan.

The second bullet point undue weight on the SHMA.Because the SHMA is not being subject to consultation or examination
before informing the plan, it should not be directly referenced in policy, and instead, a 'Policy On' approach should
be taken. Again, the policy fails to make a comparison on a detailed basis throughout the district, and provides no evidential basis to explain the imprecise approach taken.

The final bullet point create serious viability issues, who will be unable to develop strategic sites in a timely,and cost effective manner. This is in conflict with both Paragraphs 14 and 47 of the NPPF and will reduce the ability for there to be clear 'choice and competition for land', instead forcing developers to hold onto land for long periods before areas can be brought forward. the policy will will make surrounding areas undesiarble during prolonged construction periods and will add the development burdens. The policyu will also hamper the delivery of 5 year supply. The plicy is unjustified and unsound