Object
Draft Local Plan
Representation ID: 15596
Received: 05/05/2016
Respondent: Croudace Strategic Ltd
Agent: Barton Willmore
Policy 6.3 wording is not considered to be 'Consistent with national policy' as per the following:
Part (g): This is considered to be largely in compliance with the NPPF (para 132), excluding the additional requirement to consider the assets enhancement. In addition, "greater" should be reworded to state "great" in accordance with paragraph 132. The test to be considered in the NPPF, when considering the impact of a development on the significance of a designated heritage asset, is whether such development would lead to substantial harm to/total loss of a heritage asset's significance (Para 133), or less than substantial harm (Para 134).
Part (i): This fails to take acknowledge the NPPF (para 204), in that planning obligations should only be sought where necessary to make the development acceptable in planning terms, directly related to the development, and fairly and reasonably related in scale and kind to the development.
See attached.