Object

Representation ID: 66190

Received: 27/06/2014

Respondent: Hallam Land Management and William Davis

Agent: Marrons Planning

Legally compliant? No

Sound? No

Duty to co-operate? No

This policy lists a range of attributes for consideration, these can only ever be partial and so this will lead to uncertainty in the application of the policy.

Ultimately the policy seeks to conserve 'significance' which may or may nit be expressed in any of the physical characteristics or associations of a site.

The NPPF makes clear and is supported in the National Planning Practice Guidance, that setting is not an asset.

The policy also exceeds the intention of both statute and paragraph 133 of the Framework in offering a blanket ban on development causing substantial harm. As worded the policy introduces potential conflict and uncertainty in its practical application.

Finally, it is considered that the use of the verb 'should' in the second part of the policy is unclear.

The policy as worded does not accord with the advice in the NPPF and is therefore unsound. It should be reworded.