Green Belts, Safeguarded sites & Core Strategies - Public forum - Planning Advisory Service (PAS)
Ouvert
|
En cours - juillet 2012
|
Dernière modification - Hier
Green Belts, Safeguarded sites & Core Strategies
For those authorities affected by Green Belt designations, PPG2 requires when preparing new development plans documents to consider timescales longer than that normally adopted and to safeguard additional land to meet the longer term development needs. I've now reviewed a number of Core Strategies where affected by green belt policy, but none seem to be considering safeguarded sites. Does any know why?
Hi Oliver I would suggest this could be for two reasons: 1) If a LPA is able to demonstrate sufficient housing land supply within its built-up areas then they may not consider there to be a need to safeguard sites in the GB for the longer term. For LPA in the South East it was suggested that authorities plan for an additional 5 years if they are amending the GB boundary to meet the requirement for 2006-26. 2) Some LPA's may not consider this as a strategic issue i.e. if it is only small scale releases around a number of villages - they may be looking at this in a site specific/land allocations DPD rather than a Core Strategy. Hope this helps. Suzanne
Hi Suzanne, Thanks for your prompt reply. Both your answers make sense, however, if a site previously safeguarded in the Local Plan is now shown within an emerging Core Strategy as a strategic development location on the proviso that this particular LPAs first Core Strategy was declared unsound on a lack of housing supply, one would have thought that it must now fall to the Core Strategy to safeguard another site(s). Do you have an opinion on whether you agree with this assumption?
Hi Oliver You obviously have a particular LPA in mind. Without the full details its hard to comment. Furthermore I dont think it is for one LPA to try and explain what another LPA has done. All I can say is that from a Mole Valley point of view we could not as part of our Core Strategy examination identify that we could meet the housing requirement up to 2026 in the built-up areas. The Core Strategy therefore continued/'saved' the sites allocated as reserve sites in the Local Plan and effectively carried these over to the Core Strategy. We were not however, required by the Inspector and did not identify other sites for safeguarding etc. This was to be done through the Land Allocations DPD. See the link to Policy CS2 of the Core Strategy for further info. http://molevalley-consult.limehouse.co.uk/portal/cs/cs_-_adopted_oct_2009/core_strategy_-_adopted_october_2009_1?pointId=d1682747e221#section-d1682747e221