The declaration of interest, illustrated by the plan 2036 fills me with dismay. The demand for such a quantity of future housing is to my mind based purely on conjecture and imagination. If their plans are pursued or allocated to occur, I see no means for coping with the resulting increase in demands for schooling, medical and social needs. There is no mention of social; housing and care of the elderly will no doubt rely on the Private Sector. Water demands, increase in sewage and drainage also seem to be ignored. I am totally against the plan and would like to know the true cost of this to the tax payer.
[Eastleigh Borough Council] Thank you for notifying Eastleigh Borough Council about the regulation 18 consultation on the above plan, and for clarifying matters relating to the Objectively Assessed Need (letter dated 16 November 2017) Policy H1: Strategic Housing Provision The Council supports the Draft Fareham Local Plan 2036 in that it seeks to marginally exceed the PUSH SHMA OAN 2011-2036 (April 2016 update) and also meet the requirements of the PUSH Spatial Position Statement up until 2034. This aligns with the emerging approach of the Eastleigh Borough Local Plan 2016-2036, which similarly plans the over provision of new homes against the objectively assessed housing needs, in order to build in more certainty and flexibility around delivery. The Council's support for this policy approach follows a constructive meeting under the Duty to Cooperate obligations held in June 2017. Policy E5: Boatyards and Policy NE5 : New Moorings As neighbouring authority, Eastleigh Borough Council has considered draft policies relevant to the River Hamble. The three parishes of Burlesdon, Hamble-le-Rice and Hound together make up the southernmost part of the Borough fronting the Solent, bordering Fareham to the east. The Council's Local Area Manager has considered the draft Local Plan, and any policy issues affecting areas along the River Hamble. The Council supports draft policies in relation to the mooring restriction areas, boatyards, designations and nature conservation designations. We welcome further opportunities to comment as this Plan advances through to its final adoption stage.
[Winchester City Council] Thank you for consulting the City Council on the Draft Fareham Local Plan and for your letter dated 16 November 2017 regarding Objectively Assessed Needs and the Duty to Cooperate. The Draft Plan does not raise any issues that warrant the City Council making formal representations, but we would make the following officer comments and suggestions. It is noted that the Draft Plan meets the housing requirement set out in the PUSH Spatial Position Statement and extends this to 2036 based on the PUSH OAN. This is welcomed as it is important in terms of addressing strategic issues in the sub-region, under the Duty to Cooperate. However, the PUSH Position Statement’s policy H1 suggests that ‘local authorities should actively seek opportunities to identify additional potential for housing provision to address the shortfall against the objectively assessed need through the local plan process’ and it is not clear to what extent the Plan has sought to do this (especially as Welborne is partly intended to serve strategic needs). Also the Government’s proposed standard methodology for determining OAN is likely to be in place by the time the Plan is submitted for examination, so it may be necessary to plan for a higher housing requirement. The retention of the ‘Meon’ Strategic Gap (policy SP6) is welcomed and is consistent with the PUSH Spatial Position Statement. The retention of the employment allocation at Solent 2 is welcomed (policy E2) and is consistent with the allocation in the Winchester Local Plan Part 2 (policy SHUA3). However, the proposed change of Little Park Farm from an employment allocation to an ‘employment area’ (policy E3) appears inconsistent with the continued allocation of the (greenfield) part in Winchester District (Winchester Local Plan Part 2 policy SHUA4). The policy of meeting identified traveller needs within the Borough is welcomed (policy H10). However, the City Council has notified the Borough Council of its inability to meet identified needs for travelling showpersons’ accommodation, which are most significant in southern Hampshire. These needs should be acknowledged as an ‘identified need’ within the terms of policy H10, allowing a permissive approach to be taken towards any sites that may come forward and which meet the requirements of policy H10. I hope the above comments are helpful and I am happy to discuss them further if you wish.
The stated Strategy Policies, particularly SP1 is totally contrary to the very laudable 12 points in the Development Strategy. Nowhere is the term 'Sustainable' adequately defined, leaving it open to interpretation by developers and councillors. Each strategy policy must show how it fits the twelve strategy points defined and how they are 'sustainable'. Anything that uses up a finite resource (such as greenfield land) is by definition not sustainable, as it cannot be replenished.