Draft Local Plan Review

Search representations

Results for West Midlands HARP Consortium search

New search New search

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q11. Do you agree with Policy P4? If not why not, and what alternative would you suggest?

Representation ID: 1955

Received: 15/02/2017

Respondent: West Midlands HARP Consortium

Agent: Tetlow King Planning

Representation Summary:

Policy 4a - amend definition of affordable housing to align with NPPF.
Policy 4b - allow delivery of affordable housing through cross-subsidy where it can be demonstrated that affordable housing development cannot be achieved without an element of open market housing. Economic circumstances and reductions in Government subsidy have significantly reduced viability of 100% affordable housing developments.
Remove reference for need of community support as often local objection.

Full text:

see response from agent

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q12. Do you agree with the level of affordable housing being sought in Policy P4? If not why not, and what alternative would you suggest?

Representation ID: 1956

Received: 15/02/2017

Respondent: West Midlands HARP Consortium

Agent: Tetlow King Planning

Representation Summary:

Concerned that income to be spent on rent is set at 35%. Should be 25%, or 386 dwellings per year.

Full text:

see response from agent

Yes

Draft Local Plan Review

Q23. Are there any other comments you wish to make on the Draft Local Plan?

Representation ID: 2600

Received: 15/02/2017

Respondent: West Midlands HARP Consortium

Agent: Tetlow King Planning

Representation Summary:

Welcome SHMA.
Welcome non-inclusion of private rented sector in affordable housing need.
Concerned that income to be spent on rent is set at 35%. Should be 25%, or 386 dwellings per year.

Full text:

see response from agent

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q20. Do you agree with the policies for quality of place? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 2601

Received: 15/02/2017

Respondent: West Midlands HARP Consortium

Agent: Tetlow King Planning

Representation Summary:

Policy P15 - fourth bullet point should be removed as it is unnecessary. All housing development has to meet Approved Document M of the Building Regulations as a mandatory requirement.
New optional standards include a higher standard of Approved Document M of the Building Regulations under M(2) and M(3).
Have to demonstrate a "clear need" for the introduction of the optional technical standards. Should consider the impact of using these standards as part of Local Plan viability assessment.

Full text:

see response from agent

No

Draft Local Plan Review

Q20. Do you agree with the policies for quality of place? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?

Representation ID: 2602

Received: 15/02/2017

Respondent: West Midlands HARP Consortium

Agent: Tetlow King Planning

Representation Summary:

Policy P17 - Whilst Policy P4(B) sets out that rural exception schemes in the Green Belt can be considered acceptable in certain situations, it would be good practice to also include reference to Paragraph 89 of the NPPF under Policy P17 to avoid any doubt that the Local Plan is in accordance with the NPPF.

Full text:

see response from agent

If you are having trouble using the system, please try our help guide.