October 18th, 2013 |
BREAKING NEWS : THE INSPECTOR’S INTERIM REPORT
The planning inspector’s ‘Interim Report ‘ on the Site Allocations can be downloaded by clicking here.
We are still looking at it but the key points seem to be:
1) The inspector is satisfied with most of the housing site allocations, but he wants to reduce the housing proposed for Canewdon
2) For each of the housing sites, RDC had proposed that slightly more homes could be built there if there was a shortfall elsewhere, but only up to a possible maximum of 5% extra. The inspector doesn’t want to have any limit on this possible extra housing, which is worrying.
3) The inspector thinks the proposed employment land south of London Road (NEL1), isn’t needed, so that proposal is likely to be scrapped:
In my opinion Policy NEL1 is not deliverable and therefore ineffective and does not comply with national policy. Removing this site from the Plan would, in my view, be sound and the Plan would
be consistent with the Core Strategy in that eventuality.
4) The inspector seems satisfied with the proposal for the traveller and employment site at Michelin’s Farm / Fairglen – he barely mentions it in his report.
5) The inspector wants to make the site for 550 homes “North of London Road” slightly bigger, by extending it 30 metres further to the west. He thinks this would give a more suitable boundary and have the access road inside the site rather than in the Green Belt.
6) The inspector has also written about the Hockley Area Action Plan – click here to download.
Policy 6 is not sound and should be revised taking account of the following principles:
Setting a maximum overall additional retail capacity of 3,000 sq m (gross)
Removing reference to food (although this would not preclude an individual proposal from coming forward);
Giving priority to smaller shops or the expansion of existing stores; and
If a proposal for a large single store does come forward it would be expected to
demonstrate that ‘clawback’ of expenditure from other centres would be achieved and to assess the implications for them
. Any such scheme should also show that a development of this size would not harm th overall vitality of Hockley by, for example, marginalising
7) He prefers to use a different site in Great Wakering for employment land.