Object
Proposed Submission Development and Site Allocations (DaSA) Local Plan
Representation ID: 24322
Received: 06/12/2018
Respondent: Town and Country Planning Solutions
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
Paragraph 5.40 explains that draft Policy DEC3 effectively 'supersedes' Core Strategy Policy EC3. The opportunity should therefore, have been taken to review part (iv) of the draft policy as to whether the 'cascade requirements' remain necessary and reasonable. If an employment use is demonstrated not to be viable, if after considering 'complementary enabling development' or a 'mixed use scheme', it is unlikely that 'prioritising alternative community uses' would be viable and the intention of this requirement is unclear as to its planning purpose and should therefore, be deleted.
In addition, the reference to 'affordable housing' should be deleted, as the need for this would be triggered in any event if the provision contained in Policy DHG1 were to apply to a redevelopment scheme, and the words "subject to local needs" is meaningless and should also be deleted.
The Policy should therefore, be amended after the words "if a mixed use scheme is not viable" to delete the remaining wording and replace this with "then other suitable uses will be considered including housing development".
Paragraph 5.40 explains that draft Policy DEC3 effectively 'supersedes' Core Strategy Policy EC3. The opportunity should therefore, have been taken to review part (iv) of the draft policy as to whether the 'cascade requirements' remain necessary and reasonable. If an employment use is demonstrated not to be viable, if after considering 'complementary enabling development' or a 'mixed use scheme', it is unlikely that 'prioritising alternative community uses' would be viable and the intention of this requirement is unclear as to its planning purpose and should therefore, be deleted.
In addition, the reference to 'affordable housing' should be deleted, as the need for this would be triggered in any event if the provision contained in Policy DHG1 were to apply to a redevelopment scheme, and the words "subject to local needs" is meaningless and should also be deleted.
The Policy should therefore, be amended after the words "if a mixed use scheme is not viable" to delete the remaining wording and replace this with "then other suitable uses will be considered including housing development".