Object
Publication
Representation ID: 23949
Received: 17/03/2021
Respondent: Robert Gower
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Duty to co-operate? Yes
The policy to allow infill development within settlement boundaries of village clusters is supported. The identification on the proposals map of a settlement boundary at Thorpe End on the Proposals Map is supported.
However, the GNDP had proposed to undertake a review of settlement boundaries. The Great and Little Plumstead Settlement Booklet states: “Sites of less than 0.5ha are not considered suitable for allocation and therefore have not been assessed in this booklet. These sites will be considered as part of a reappraisal of settlement boundaries to be published with the Regulation 19 Submission version of the Plan”. The GNLP Reg 19 Consultation Website states: “Previously defined Settlement Boundaries have been brought forward into the plan without amendment”. It is not clear from the consultation document or the evidence base whether this reappraisal of settlement boundaries has taken place and if so where the appraisal process and findings are reported.
We submitted representations to the Reg 18c consultation proposing the inclusion of site GNLPSL3006 within the settlement boundary for Thorpe End (please refer to representation 21170). We propose there may be issues with soundness if the reappraisal has not taken place as planned because the settlement boundaries will otherwise be based on out of date evidence. For example, the settlement boundary to the south east of Thorpe End no longer reflects the true physical boundary now apparent on the ground which has come about due to changes in land use over 10 years ago. A settlement boundary reappraisal would enable the inclusion of a suitable plot for one dwelling on site GNLPSL3006. There are likely to be many other plots such as this that would otherwise have been identified through the reappraisal process. Failing to undertake the settlement boundary reappraisal would therefore result in a lost opportunity to encourage windfall development to come forward on the most suitable sites.
To ensure the plan is sound we propose that the settlement boundary reappraisal should take place before the plan is submitted for examination. Alternatively, the wording of Policy 7.4 should be amended to allow small scale windfall development on sites that are assessed on a case by case basis as forming a natural adjustment to the settlement boundary. As this assessment would be taking place on an ad hoc basis in lieu of a holistic settlement boundary reappraisal it is therefore proposed that windfall development permitted under this policy should be separate to the cumulative number of dwellings per parish allowed for under Policy 7.5.
For clarity, we also propose there should be a consistent use of either "settlement boundary" or "development boundary".
Please find attached the following Representation Forms for Policy 1, Policy 7.4, Policy 7.5 and Paragraph 301 of the above consultation document. I have also reattached our Reg 18 Supplement Statement and appendices for reference in support of our representation to Policy 7.4. Please do not hesitate to contact me if you require any further information.