Some of these cookies are necessary to make the site work. We’d also like to use optional cookies to help improve your experience on the site. You can manage your optional cookie preferences below. Using this tool will set a cookie on your device to remember your preferences. Your preferences can be changed at any time.
For further details, see our Cookie Policy and our Privacy Policy
Essential cookies enable core functionality such as page navigation and access to secure areas. The website cannot function properly without these cookies; they can only be disabled by changing your browser preferences. Third party functions such as Google Search and Analytics will not be enabled.
Performance settings enable you to use the Google Search engine on our website and help us to improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage (for example, which of our pages are most frequently visited).
Number of representations on policy: 10
Objection: 1
Support: 2
Comment: 7
The plan is not accessible with 1,000s of pages of evidence and inaccurate data included (such as 7,000 residents in Portchester and that the plan does not reflect 19,000 being registered with doctors but only 14,000 on electoral roll).
Welcome and support the identification of heritage assets in paragraph 1.39. (Historic England).
Paragraphs 1.21 to 1.25 are supported and the Council should not support building on the draft sites until the Plan has been fully adopted.
The Council should consider including data on health and wellbeing to set the context. (Hampshire County Council).
Hampshire County Council as the Minerals and Waste Planning Authority are pleased to see that the draft Local Plan and appendices reference the adopted Hampshire Minerals and Waste plan (2013). However this seems to be only briefly mentioned in the glossary of terms and the County Council consider that this adopted planning policy needs to be adequately referenced in the draft Local Plan (Hampshire County Council – Strategic Planning).
The 'ideals' articulated in the document need to be enforced in reality.
The PUSH housing need figures should be carefully considered in the light of BREXIT.
Paragraph 1.38 mentions the presence of the 3 main rivers in the Borough. However, the Plan does not seem to highlight that they pose a potential flood risk. It would be useful if the Plan acknowledged this. In addition, there is little recognition throughout the Plan regarding the water environment in general. The importance of the 3 rivers in the Borough should be better recognised in the Plan not only in relation to the environment but also potential public amenity and health and wellbeing benefits. (Environment Agency).
Within Paragraph 1.38 it is considered that the national and international designations applying to the coastal and estuarine areas should be highlighted by the reference of their inclusion as part of the Natura 2000 suite of sites SPA, SAC, Ramsar. Whilst highlighting some of the features of ecological importance this paragraph only highlights designations of national importance. (Hampshire & Isle of Wight Wildlife Trust).
Back to Top
How to get here
