Local Development Framework Consultation

I have read the guidance notes

LA1.3 Housing Allocations - Site Omission

Land at Greenside Farm, Hincaster

Yes

No

The DPD is not justified in that it is not founded on a robust and credible evidence base and/or is not considered the most appropriate strategy when considered against the reasonable alternatives.

The DPD is not effective in that the document is not deliverable, flexible or capable of being monitored.

The DPD is not consistent with national policy.

Please refer to attached documents

LAND AT GREENSIDE FARM, HINCASTER
REPRESENTATIONS IN RELATION TO SOUTH LAKELAND LAND ALLOCATIONS DEVELOPMENT PLAN DOCUMENT
Our Ref: CNG/178/CSL
LPA SITE REF: RN128 AND EN43

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1
These representations are submitted on behalf of Mr and Mrs McHardy, the owners of land at Greenside Farm, Hincaster. The site comprises of buildings formerly use as an egg production/packing/distribution plant.
1.2
There is an extant planning permission on the site for a static holiday caravan and lodge park to accommodate 84 caravans and lodges (2010/0828).
1.3
The site is located on the edge of the small village/hamlet of Hincaster.
1.4
The Emerging Options Consultation Edition dated January 2011 identified part of the site (0.56ha) for residential development to accommodate 15 dwellings (RN128) in the second phase and part of the site (0.86ha) for local employment purposes (EN43). In that document it was stated:-
“An exceptional allocation is suggested at Greenside Farm near Hincaster where development would result in clear upgrading of the local environment.”
1.5
It is not entirely clear why the authority describe the proposed allocation as “exceptional” as it clearly lies on the edge of a small village and hamlet. Nevertheless the benefits to the local environment remains and it is considered a residential allocation would be entirely appropriate.
1.6
The site is not allocated in the latest Land Allocations document simply because the planning authority decided to dispense with allocations on the edge of this category of settlement not because the site is no longer considered suitable for development. It is suggested that the area of land indicated on the attached plan (Appendix A) is identified for housing development to accommodate approximately 25 dwellings in the first phase.
2. HOUSING REQUIREMENTS
2.1
The planning authority indicate how Core Strategy gross housing requirements are to be accommodated by a combination of housing completions, planning permissions, small site contributions, housing allocations, mixed use sites, broad locations and assumed contributions from small villages and hamlets.
2.2
It is the Objector’s view that the planning authority under estimate net requirements and over estimate likely delivery of housing completions in the plan period. As a result a significant housing land shortfall has been identified.

2.3
The detailed case is set out in appendices B to D inclusive, including a detailed explanation as to why there is likely to be a significant shortfall in completions from the small villages and hamlets. The table below indicates the extent of housing shortfall in each settlement category.
See attached document for Table 1

3. SMALL VILLAGES AND HAMLETS HOUSING REQUIREMENTS
3.1
The comparative positions in relation to the Small Villages and Hamlets are summarised in Table 2.
See attached document for Table 2
3.3
The Objector considers there is a shortfall of housing provision in the Small Villages and Hamlets to meet Core Strategy requirements. Providing allocations on the edge of the small villages and hamlets specifically mentioned in the Core Strategy would be counted against the anticipated contribution of 231 dwellings. Only new allocations on the edge of hamlets such as Hincaster would increase housing provision above that already anticipated.
3.4
At this stage it is not suggested there is a fundamental review of the Land Allocations document in terms of specifically identifying housing sites to meet the shortfall in and on the edge of small villages and hamlets. Completions will come forward on the edge of specifically identified small villages and hamlets, but elsewhere, where the opportunity arises at this stage in the plan process, sites outside those settlements should be allocated.
4. CONCLUSION ON HOUSING LAND REQUIREMENTS
4.1
From the above analysis it is apparent there is a significant district wide shortfall of housing allocations to provide for sufficient housing to meet Core Strategy housing requirements and a shortfall in the Small Villages and Hamlets category.
4.2
Analysis set out in Appendix D would suggest the amount of housing likely to be delivered in and on the edge of smaller villages and hamlets is likely to be significantly below the policy rate and housing completions from sites in the open countryside will be negligible in the future.
4.3
Bearing in mind the above, it is important that where an opportunity to provide for additional housing on the edge of a small village or hamlet arises, such as Hincaster the Land Allocations document provides some certainty for the owners by allocating the site for residential purposes.
5. SUITABILITY OF THE SITE FOR HOUSING
5.1
The National Planning Framework indicates that :-
“47 To boost significantly the supply of housing, local planning authorities should:-
Use their evidence base to ensure that their Local Plan meets the full, objectively assessed needs for market and affordable housing in the housing market area, as far as is consistent with the policies set out in this Framework, including identifying key sites which are critical to the delivery of the housing strategy over the plan period;...”
5.2
The Emerging Options Consultation Edition dated January 2011 identified part of the site (0.56ha) for residential development to accommodate 15 dwellings (RN128) in the second phase and part of the site (0.86ha) for local employment purposes (EN43).
5.3
The Objector is not convinced that there is a market for employment uses in this locality and seeks an allocation to accommodate approximately 25 dwellings in the first phase.
6. DELIVERABILITY
6.1
The National Planning Framework indicates that planning authorities should:-
47...identify and update annually a supply of specific deliverable sites...”
Footnote 11 indicates that:-
“To be considered deliverable, sites should be available now, offer a suitable location for development now, and be achievable with a realistic prospect that housing will be delivered on the site within five years and in particular development of the site is viable...”
6.2
The site is available now because there is a willing landowner and the site has no legal constraints to development.
6.3
The site is in a suitable location for housing development being located on the edge of small village/hamlet where the Core Strategy indicates significant housing should be accommodated.
7. CONCLUSIONS
7.1
The Allocations document does not identify sufficient housing land to meet Core Strategy housing requirements in the period 2003-2025 and therefore a significant amount of additional housing needs to be provided for. The Objection site should be identified for housing development to meet the identified shortfalls at both District and Small Village and Hamlet levels.
7.2
The site has previously been identified by the planning authority as suitable, at least in part, for housing development.
7.3
The site should be identified in Policy LA1.3: Housing Allocations, as a site capable of accommodating approximately 25 dwellings in Phase 1.

See attached document for Appendices

NO, I do not wish to participate at the oral examination

Technical nature of submissions

Please notify me