<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <title>Local Plan Review plan period</title>
  <link rel="self" href="https://khub.net/fr/c/message_boards/find_thread?p_l_id=53683759&amp;threadId=569882182" />
  <subtitle>Local Plan Review plan period</subtitle>
  <id>https://khub.net/fr/c/message_boards/find_thread?p_l_id=53683759&amp;threadId=569882182</id>
  <updated>2026-08-12T15:46:22Z</updated>
  <dc:date>2026-08-12T15:46:22Z</dc:date>
  <entry>
    <title>Local Plan Review plan period</title>
    <link rel="alternate" href="https://khub.net/fr/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=569882181" />
    <author>
      <name>David Pickhaver</name>
    </author>
    <id>https://khub.net/fr/c/message_boards/find_message?p_l_id=53683759&amp;messageId=569882181</id>
    <updated>2021-12-06T11:12:46Z</updated>
    <published>2021-12-06T11:00:57Z</published>
    <summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;My council adopted its Local Plan in December 2015.  The plan period
  is 2012-30.    The five year review in December 2020 found that most
  policies remain up to date, apart from its policies for the supply of
  housing, due to undersupply and the standard method LHN calculation. 
  Members instructed officers to carry out a limited update of housing
  policies.  The question has arisen as to whether the Plan period needs
  to roll forward e.g. to 2040 to allow for 15 years post adoption
  period (as required by paragraphs 22 and 68 of the NPPF,); or can the
  Plan period terminal date remain at the current date of 2030?  The
  argument for keeping the 2030 date being that it's a review of the
  plan under para 33 of the NPPF not a new Plan. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;To complicate matters, it is likely that the council will need to
  seek to reduce the housing requirement due to environmental
  constraints including AONB and 2 SACs; so it is not just a matter of
  allocating additional housing sites to make up the shortfall under a
  site allocations DPD. &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Advice would be gratefully received- thanks &lt;/p&gt;</summary>
    <dc:creator>David Pickhaver</dc:creator>
    <dc:date>2021-12-06T11:00:57Z</dc:date>
  </entry>
</feed>
