Section 7: Delivery and Monitoring

DLP_1803

Royal Tunbridge Wells Town Forum

Section 7: Delivery and monitoring Paragraphs 7.1-7.24

In paragraph 7.15 we agree that it is vital to monitor if the Plan is delivering the amount and type of development identified and that it is being delivered in the right place at the right time. This should be done taking account of the paragraph 7.19 review of any, or any forecast, material, political, social, economic technological and environmental contextual changes. This rational approach seems to be potentially contradicted by the government- imposed requirements in paragraph 7.22 in relation to housing provision.

DLP_2683

St. John's Road Residents association

No Comment.

DLP_2925

Chris Gow

Section 7:

Pressure to deliver housing within the terms of the Local Plan, and targets set by others should not deter the council from taking right and proper action for the benefit of the residents of the borough.

The council must resist pressure from developers to, for example, bend the rules, and for example, allow development of Green Belt land.

DLP_3978

IDE Planning for Paddock Wood Town Council

Paragraphs 7.5-7.12

SUPPORT

[Refers to a Housing Action Plan].

DLP_6695

Gladman

Section 7: Delivery and monitoring

7 DELIVERY AND MONITORING

7.1 Monitoring and Review

7.1.1 Section 7 of the Draft Local Plan sets out how the Council is to secure the delivery of its policies and objectives. To enhance the effectiveness of this, together with ensuring that the Local Plan is responsive to changing standards, requirements and sub-regional needs, Gladman consider that a review mechanism should be inserted into the Local Plan.

7.1.2 Gladman consider that triggers for such a review include:

* Significant changes to housing or economic land requirements;

* A request from a neighbouring authority to meet declared unmet housing needs and/or the adoption of a sub-regional spatial framework to respond to unmet housing needs;

* Where housing delivery consistently falls short of identified requirements;

* Where the Council is unable to identify a five-year supply of housing land with no prospect of a five-year land supply in the near future;

* Should delivery at a strategic site integral to the spatial strategy fail to come forward within the timescales or at the pace estimated;

* Should identified infrastructure required to support the sustainable delivery of the spatial strategy fail to come forward as required;

* Should national planning policy or associated standards change significantly; and

* Should viability evidence indicate a significant shift in the value of land to accommodate identified policy and infrastructure requirements.

7.1.3 The timescale necessary to conduct and conclude such a review will largely depend on its scope. Gladman consider that a full plan review could be completed to submission to secretary of state within a period of 30 months. Whilst a partial review could be completed in 18 months.

7.1.4 Critically to ensure that such a review holds true, the wording for the policy should set out that any policy subject to review will be treated as out-of-date until such review has been concluded. In this circumstance national planning policy would apply.

[TWBC: see full representation].

[TWBC: see also Comment Nos. DLP_6656-6695]