But this comes back to one of the fundamental questions with the new NPPF etc....does the fact that a site is not sufficiently contaminated to be determined as "Contaminated Land" mean that is is suitable for proposed future uses - Remove the S from SPOSH and you get a Possibility of Significant Harm which in itself (without the 'significant') is not going to be "Contaminated Land" and by virtue of the statements in the NPPF any development with meets POSH but not SPOSH should therefore be permitted - at the very least this is the argument that we are going to get from planners and those driving developments.
|