D. A number of fewer larger extensions to the existing residential area

On behalf of Southern & Regional Developments, Claremont Planning are of the view that the LPA should adopt an approach which incorporates both Options C and D. Whilst both options could provide suitable and appropriate avenues to deliver sufficient homes to meet the identified need, pursuing one option over the other will place too much emphasis and reliance on one mechanism of housing delivery. Relying upon large-scale strategic allocations to deliver homes often leads to delays as infrastructure is provided and if sites are bought forward by a sole developer. Whilst in contrast reliance upon numerous smaller sites means that the critical mass of housing delivery is never realised, and that infrastructure investment is compromised. In using both options, it allows greater flexibility within the plan to deliver homes through smaller site being able to be developed faster and address immediate housing needs, whilst larger strategic allocations maintain a rolling stock of homes once their infrastructure is in place. The execution of one option alone will be a lost opportunity to deliver through a Local Plan that recognises the pressures on development, market influences and adopts a long-term approach to local requirements. The shared approach will ensure a more effective plan and will assure that the plan meets the plan-making principles as set forward in the National Planning Policy Framework.

Large sites can provide a useful long term delivery strategy further in the plan period, however large sites are complicated to get going, requiring heavy infrastructure upgrades. They could take 2-3 years before they start delivering units and then they are restricted to the maximum speed of build/sales. In my experience the most a single outlet can produce is 80 houses a year. A large site may have more than one developer, but the more completion there is, the slower the sales go. So if there were 2, each would deliver 60 units if there were 3, then each would deliver 50 and so on.

What are the realistic options.

GVA would support Options 3 and 4 which would utilise land adjacent to existing settlements in order to deliver new housing. This would ensure that housing is delivered where it is accessible to existing social and community infrastructure and in close proximity to existing sustainable modes of travel.

In particular, GVA would suggest that new development should be located adjacent to Tier 1 and 2 settlements where such facilities are focused.

The Land at Pooles Lane at Hulbridge, which is a Tier 2 settlement provides such a suitable location for growth