Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031
Search representations
Results for Mrs Hazel Izod search
New searchObject
Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031
MM 216 / FM 112
Representation ID: 8839
Received: 23/06/2021
Respondent: Mrs Hazel Izod
NHDC have made it very clear that BK3 should be deleted and Barkway reinstated as a Category A Village. A 140 dwelling site on the edge of a village without full first school provision is unsustainable. HCC made it clear that the reserve school site is not needed in the Plan period. Based on the evidence submitted, retention of BK3 therefore renders the Plan unsound as it has not been positively prepared and is unjustified - contrary to Para 35 of the NPPF. Deletion of BK3 will not underline the spatial strategy, 5 year supply, or have any wider implications.
NHDC made it very clear in their Hearing Statement of February 2021 (Matter 30) that Site BK3 should be deleted, and that there is no reasonable likelihood of the reserve school site being required during the plan period.
NHDC have also made their concerns very clear regarding integration of BK3 in urban design terms. Without the school site, the new housing will be divorced from the built form of the village. In response to Question 30.1(c), NHDC clearly stated that the allocation should be deleted as it is no longer justified or consistent with national policy.
The revised wording for policy BK3 includes a “contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools” in attempt to justify the sustainability of 140 new homes. However, this relies on young children using a bus to access First School provision and brings into question the settlement hierarchy of the whole Plan. If it is considered sustainable to rely on a bus service for a 140 dwelling development, then this opens up a number of other opportunities for similar scale developments in villages that lack full First School provision. This is not justified within the settlement hierarchy and makes the Plan unsound.
Quite correctly, in response to Question 30.3, NHDC made it clear that Barkway should be a Category A village. Para 13.35 of the Submission Local Plan inc. Further Modifications accepts that ‘facilities are limited’ in the village. This paragraph also attempts to justify the scale of new development as a response to Barkway’s ‘development needs’. However, a site for 140 new dwellings is not what the village needs, and is wholly disproportionate to the scale and character of the village, which has evolved as a linear settlement.
The table submitted by NHDC in response to Question 30.4(c) clearly highlights the disproportionate allocation of new housing for Barkway compared to 2011 population figures and current school provision for other settlements. This is not sustainable.
It is unclear why the Inspector would retain Site BK3 within the Plan on the basis of the evidence submitted, and NHDC’s own request for deletion. No correspondence has been made public to justify this position.
Ultimately, removal of site BK3 from the Plan will not undermine the Local Plan’s spatial strategy, will not compromise the Council’s 5 year supply position, nor will it have any wider implications. There is therefore no reason for this site to remain in the Plan. Site BK3 should be deleted and Barkway reinstated as a Category A Village. Retention of site BK3 within the Plan renders it unsound as it has not been positively prepared, and is not justified. The Local Plan is therefore in conflict with Paragraph 35 of the NPPF.
Object
Further Proposed Modifications to the North Hertfordshire Local Plan 2011- 2031
MM 213 / FM 108
Representation ID: 8840
Received: 23/06/2021
Respondent: Mrs Hazel Izod
NHDC have made it very clear that BK3 should be deleted and Barkway reinstated as a Category A Village. A 140 dwelling site on the edge of a village without full first school provision is unsustainable. HCC made it clear that the reserve school site is not needed in the Plan period. Based on the evidence submitted, retention of BK3 therefore renders the Plan unsound as it has not been positively prepared and is unjustified - contrary to Para 35 of the NPPF. Deletion of BK3 will not underline the spatial strategy, 5 year supply, or have any wider implications.
NHDC made it very clear in their Hearing Statement of February 2021 (Matter 30) that Site BK3 should be deleted, and that there is no reasonable likelihood of the reserve school site being required during the plan period.
NHDC have also made their concerns very clear regarding integration of BK3 in urban design terms. Without the school site, the new housing will be divorced from the built form of the village. In response to Question 30.1(c), NHDC clearly stated that the allocation should be deleted as it is no longer justified or consistent with national policy.
The revised wording for policy BK3 includes a “contribution towards travel by sustainable modes of transport between Barley and Barkway schools” in attempt to justify the sustainability of 140 new homes. However, this relies on young children using a bus to access First School provision and brings into question the settlement hierarchy of the whole Plan. If it is considered sustainable to rely on a bus service for a 140 dwelling development, then this opens up a number of other opportunities for similar scale developments in villages that lack full First School provision. This is not justified within the settlement hierarchy and makes the Plan unsound.
Quite correctly, in response to Question 30.3, NHDC made it clear that Barkway should be a Category A village. Para 13.35 of the Submission Local Plan inc. Further Modifications accepts that ‘facilities are limited’ in the village. This paragraph also attempts to justify the scale of new development as a response to Barkway’s ‘development needs’. However, a site for 140 new dwellings is not what the village needs, and is wholly disproportionate to the scale and character of the village, which has evolved as a linear settlement.
The table submitted by NHDC in response to Question 30.4(c) clearly highlights the disproportionate allocation of new housing for Barkway compared to 2011 population figures and current school provision for other settlements. This is not sustainable.
It is unclear why the Inspector would retain Site BK3 within the Plan on the basis of the evidence submitted, and NHDC’s own request for deletion. No correspondence has been made public to justify this position.
Ultimately, removal of site BK3 from the Plan will not undermine the Local Plan’s spatial strategy, will not compromise the Council’s 5 year supply position, nor will it have any wider implications. There is therefore no reason for this site to remain in the Plan. Site BK3 should be deleted and Barkway reinstated as a Category A Village. Retention of site BK3 within the Plan renders it unsound as it has not been positively prepared, and is not justified. The Local Plan is therefore in conflict with Paragraph 35 of the NPPF.