Comment

Representation ID: 2822

Received: 13/09/2017

Respondent: ROSCONN STRATEGIC LAND

Agree (support Option 1A)
As very broad, high level strategic options, Option 1A appears to be the more appropriate and deliverable option. Option 1B raises significant challenges, not least the ability to deliver the area's housing and employment needs when it is needed. The key advantage of Option 1A identified in the table at paragraph 4.20 is that it can significantly boost the supply of housing and employment land. This has to be given significant weight in deciding which option is preferable, when assessing options against the objectives of the NPPF. Both options are identified as requiring significant adjustments to Green Belt boundaries, but in the context of there being exceptional circumstances to do so, this is not considered to be a determinative factor.