Independent inspectors are due to report back about the draft Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole (BCP) Local Plan following a public examination.

KPPC’s Planning Director Adam Bennett made representations and gave evidence about the BCP Council planning blueprint in sessions over two and half days.

As well as our own firm, Adam also represented selected clients and partners in an effort to protect future development interests in the area and, more broadly, the interests of our industry.

Adam challenged the premises of the draft plan to show why it is inconsistent with national policy and should be found legally and procedurally unsound by the examiners.

Concerns over the plan stemmed from its strategy of taking an artificial constraints-based approach to development within the conurbation.

Essentially this is a strategy of seeking to restrict growth and impose entirely unjustified constraints on building heights, densities and housing mix, and limiting all development to the existing urban area – effectively ruling out Green Belt development.

Ultimately this will constrict the ability to viably deliver residential and other development schemes in the area.

Adam argued persuasively on a number of counts in the Matters 1 and 2 Hearing Sessions:

• Duty to Co-Operate (DtC)
• Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA)
• Housing Need/Supply
• Soundness:

The Draft BCP Local Plan showed a significant shortfall with its proposal to deliver 24,000 homes (1,600 dwellings per annum) against an identified housing need of 42,090 homes or 2,806 homes per annum – now increased to 2958 homes per annum under the revised 2024 National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF).

Adam said: “The council believed that it had a choice whether or not to release land from the Green Belt – arguing it to be unsustainably located with no opportunities for connections to infrastructure and remote from employment opportunities and other services and facilities.

“As we all know, this is as a starting point simply wrong. There were many, many opportunities to release land close to existing infrastructure that is low value and should be developed.”

Adam provided a detailed closing statement to the examiners to express frustration that the very real concerns of the industry were not taken into account.

He said: “We recognised the clear hard work that the council’s officers had put in, but that this work had unfortunately been undertaken on the wrong starting premise.

“We reinforced our desire to work with officers moving forwards to get a proper plan in place that works for BCP conurbation and that supports properly the professionals, developers, stakeholders, and local people who deserve a degree of certainty that BCP is open for business and wants to support growth.”

The Independent Examiners have not yet committed to a date or timeline for their report, but may be a number of weeks, until we have a clear position.

If the Local Plan is considered unsound, this will provide new opportunities to both promote sites and land interests through a new Local Plan making process, which BCP Council will be required to undertake at speed.

If you would like to discuss further how the outcome of the BCP Local Plan may affect your sites or provide new potential opportunities, please contact Adam at KPPC.

You can also get in touch for a full account of our evidence given during the sessions.