Comment
Draft Local Plan - Supplementary Consultation
Representation ID: 8505
Received: 15/03/2019
Respondent: Simon Taylor
- Not convinced approach incentivises smaller market housing.
- Developers could simply increase scale of larger homes to increase overall meterage, so that smaller homes were medium sized.
- SMBC's Meeting Housing Needs SPD states the need vs supply of smaller housing is greater in Dorridge and elsewhere than Dickens Heath, so why is no housing proposed for Dorridge, where the need for smaller houses is higher?
I'm not exactly sure how this approach would incentivise smaller market housing. Based on the above, if developers were savvy, they could simply increase the scale of larger homes to increase the overall square meterage, therefore allowing what are envisaged as smaller homes to actually be medium sized (based on the 40% of total square meterage formula)
In addition, I believe thought should be given to the shortfalls of smaller housing in certain areas as part of the developer incentivisation. Solihull MBC's own Supplementary Planning Draft Document cites that the supply versus demand for Dickens Heath represents a 14% shortfall on 1 bed property and 4% shortfall on 2 bed. Contrast this to Knowle/Dorridge/Bentley Heath for instance and there is a 17% shortfall on 1 bed property, and a 25% shortfall on 2 bed. The differences are stark, and are of equal proportion within other regions, why is it therefore that substantial developments are proposed for Dickens Heath (and South Shirley) with 40% affordable homes allocation, when there are none proposed for Dorridge where the requirement is far higher?