Local Plan Main Modifications Consultation
Policy 45: Development Affecting Non-Designated Heritage Assets
| Local Plan page number | Policy or paragraph Local Plan | Proposed Change | Justification |
|---|---|---|---|
| 140 | Policy 45: Criterion 3 |
In determining applications that would result in substantial harm to, or total loss of, a non-designated heritage asset or its setting, proposals must demonstrate that the public benefits of the development would outweigh any harm or loss of the heritage asset, based on heritage significance. A [removed] a balanced judgement will be required having regard to the scale of any harm or loss and the significance of the heritage asset. |
Effective Consistent with National Policy |
What to consider when making a representation
What are the tests of soundness and legal compliance?
The purpose of the examination is to consider whether the local plan complies with relevant legal requirements for producing local plans, including the duty to cooperate, and meets the national tests of ‘soundness’ for local plans set out in the National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).
Therefore, representations submitted at this stage must only be made on these grounds and, where relevant, be supported with evidence to demonstrate why these tests have not been met.
Legal compliance
To be legally compliant the plan has to be prepared in accordance with the duty to cooperate and legal and procedural requirements, including the 2011 Localism Act and Town and County Planning (Local Planning) (England) Regulations 2012 (as amended).
Soundness
The inspector conducting the examination in public has to be satisfied that the local plan is ‘sound’; namely that it is:
• Positively prepared – the plan should be prepared based on a strategy which seeks to meet objectively assessed development and infrastructure requirements, including unmet requirements from neighbouring authorities where it is reasonable to do so and consistent with achieving sustainable development.
• Justified – the plan should be the most appropriate strategy, when considered against the reasonable alternatives, based on proportionate evidence.
• Effective – the plan should be deliverable over its period and based on effective joint working on cross-boundary strategic priorities, and
• Consistent with national policy – the plan should enable the delivery of sustainable development in accordance with the policies in the NPPF.