Aylesbury Vale Area

Object

VALP Main Modifications

Representation ID: 3071

Received: 17/12/2019

Respondent: Clifton Kirstie (Bovis Homes Limited)

Agent: Define Planning & Design

Legally compliant? Yes

Sound? Yes

Representation Summary:

Bovis Homes supports the appropriate addition of a reference to the need "to support thriving rural communities" through development. However, whilst the addition of this statement is certainly welcomed, Bovis Homes notes that the remainder of the Local Plan does not respond to, or accord with, Policy S3 and fails to allocate sufficient development in settlements that are deemed to be suitable to accommodate residential development.

Change suggested by respondent:

None specific to MM014 - changes proposed in relation to other specific modifications to address failure to allocate sufficient sites to promote sustainable development in rural areas.

Full text:

Bovis Homes supports the appropriate addition of a reference to the need "to support thriving rural communities" through development, noting its 'in principle' accordance with NPPF paragraph 78 that states that, "to promote sustainable development in rural areas, housing should be located where it will enhance or maintain the vitality of rural communities." NPPF paragraph 78 outlines that "planning policies should identify opportunities for villages to grow and thrive, especially where this will support local services."

However, whilst the addition of this statement is certainly welcomed, Bovis Homes notes that the remainder of the Local Plan does not respond to, or accord with, Policy S3 as amended through MM014. Notably, MM014 appears to afford a particular emphasis on the delivery of small and medium sites, yet the Local Plan fails to allocate sufficient development in settlements that are deemed to be suitable to accommodate residential development. In particular, the Draft Plan's failure to maximise housing delivery within the large village of Stone, despite the evident additional capacity within site allocation D-STO008, is discussed in response to MM094 below. Within this, it is clearly shown that the development does not compromise the character of the countryside (limb a) or result in a negative impact on the identities of neighbouring settlements (limb b).