Local Plan to 2030 Regulation 19 - Publication June 2016

Comment ID ALP/685
Document Section Local Plan to 2030 - Publication Draft TOPIC POLICIES SECTION A - HOUSING Residential Extensions and Standalone Annexes Content View all on this section
Respondent Paul Buggins View all by this respondent
Response Date 31 Jul 2016
Do you consider this part of the document is Sound? No
On which grounds do you consider the document unsound? (if applicable)
  • Not Effective
Do you consider the Document is Legally Compliant? Yes

HOU9 is somewhat vague. The interpretation commentary infers the permission/need for the annexe can only ever be temporary. It is not explicit within the policy wording; it must be. In reality how would any such temporary permission be policed and enforced. I believe that when considering application for annexe it must be accepted that it would be a permanent feature and apply stricter criteria, including removal of any further permitted development rights. Additionally, the policy needs to be strong to prevent the potential for creation of a separate dwelling.

Again this point about what is in the dialogue (interpretation aspects) as opposed to embedded within the policies highlights another general point to review throughout the whole plan. In as much that it is the policy wording that is important and NOT other surrounding dialogue. This was emphasised in a recent judicial review in the high court. I urge the council to check that all items that are intended to be policy are correctly embedded within the policies 

What changes do you suggest to make the document legally compliant or sound?
Do you consider it necessary to participate at the oral part of the examination? No
Does your representation relate to an omission site (a site that has not been included). For example a site for Housing, Employment, Travellers, or Local Green Spaces.
Please supply details of the omission site.