Proposed Revisions to Draft Local Plan (Preferred Options)

Document Section 1. Preferred Options Revisions Section 3 - Revised Policy SP11 - Housing Provision Revised Policy SP11 - Housing Provision [View all comments on this section]
Comment ID 1234
Respondent Pamela Pople - Margate Town Team [View all comments by this respondent]
Response Date 23 Mar 2017
Response Type OBJECT
What is the nature of this representation?
  • Object
Comment

This submission should be read together with the Society's 2015 submission when the proposal was for an unrealistic and inappropriate 12,000 houses also with no infrastructure information.
17,140 new houses equates to a population explosion of approximately 40,000 people (some 30%). No satisfactory evidence has been provided to support this and no allowance has been made for the existing unimplemented planning consents and empty properties amounting to some 7,500+ units.
There remains a complete lack of firm infrastructure proposals to support development on this scale - it is simply not good enough to state that 'discussions are on-going' - this will guarantee nothing.

MCS is opposed to the use of Grade 1 agricultural land at ST1 and ST2 in direct contradiction of National Planning Policy Framework 2013 Section 11, Subsection 112 which states that the use of poorer quality land should always prevail.

MCS is opposed to the total lack of consultation with the local community prior to issuing the Draft Local Plan document which is in direct contradiction to Central Government's published Best Practice guidelines.

MCS is opposed to the total lack of joined-up thinking at a time when a number of East Kent local authorities including Thanet are seriously considering amalgamation to form a single Combined Authority. It is hoped that such a regional organisation adequately resourced will develop an appropriate Plan based on the actual local needs of local people and MCS notes the observation of the Secretary of State that 'communities need infrastructure'. Sadly this observation does not appear to have yet permeated through to this District.

Thank you for your attention and my apologies for the Society's delayed response. We remain hopeful that a full consultation including a credible and affordable infrastructure provision may yet take place.

Attachments