Draft Local Plan Review
Search representations
Results for Taylor Wimpey search
New searchNo
Draft Local Plan Review
Q13. Which option for delivering self and custom housebuilding do you favour and why? If neither, do you have any other suggestions?
Representation ID: 4953
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Lichfields
Support option 1.
Object to the requirement that developers will be expected to supply 5% of dwelling plots for sale to self-builders for of more than 100 dwellings as this wouldn't enable a comprehensive and holistic development in terms of delivery and design. It would also provide numerous health and safety issues trying to work with numerous individuals and their associated contractors which would ultimately slow down delivery.
see attached - site 12 land south Dog Kennel Lane
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Q14. Do you agree that we are planning to build the right number of new homes? If not why not, and how many do you think we should be planning to build?
Representation ID: 4954
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Lichfields
SHMA has broadly followed PPG but underestimated headship rates for younger persons and affordability constraints. Therefore OAN should probably be higher.
Housing requirement conflates market signals and unmet housing need. Keeping both separate takes total housing requirement to 16,277 dwellings.
Using evidenced based metrics on population share, migratory and commuting relationships it is clear that Solihull has the strongest relationship in HMA with Birmingham, with a minimum of 24.7% being a 'fair share' of need accommodated. This equates to 9,361 homes of Birmingham's 37,900 unmet housing need. Even if discount 2,654 this amounts to 6,707 units.
see attached - site 12 land south Dog Kennel Lane
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Q16. Do you believe we have identified the infrastructure[35] required to support these developments? If not why not? Are there any additional facilities you believe are required, if so what are the
Representation ID: 4955
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Lichfields
In relation to Site 12:
Taylor Wimpey specific comments include:
* Integrating new highway with proposed development at West of Dickens Heath on B4102 and Dog Kennel Lane. Further clarification is required from the Council on this requirement.
* Possible capacity enhancement to A34. TW support the need for possible 'mobility' capacity enhancements to A34, with priority given to pedestrians, cyclists and public transport in terms of the movement hierarchy.
* Requires multiple points of vehicular access. This should also include non-vehicular access.
see attached - site 12 land south Dog Kennel Lane
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Q18. Do you agree with the policies for improving accessibility and encouraging sustainable travel? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?
Representation ID: 4956
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Lichfields
Whilst it is reasonable to expect good connectivity to public transport, including buses, good connectivity dos not necessarily always mean a bus stop within 400m of each and every property.
Nowadays, it is the ease of access, and quality of provision that is most important, and whilst distance is one factor it is by no means the only, or even the most important. Decision making is based on perception of convenience, and not just distance.
see attached - site 12 land south Dog Kennel Lane
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Q18. Do you agree with the policies for improving accessibility and encouraging sustainable travel? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?
Representation ID: 4957
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Lichfields
Whilst it is reasonable to expect good connectivity to public transport, including buses, good connectivity dos not necessarily always mean a bus stop within 400m of each and every property.
Nowadays, it is the ease of access, and quality of provision that is most important, and whilst distance is one factor it is by no means the only, or even the most important. Decision making is based on perception of convenience, and not just distance.
see attached - site 12 land south Dog Kennel Lane
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Q18. Do you agree with the policies for improving accessibility and encouraging sustainable travel? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?
Representation ID: 4958
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Lichfields
Whilst it is reasonable to expect good connectivity to public transport, including buses, good connectivity dos not necessarily always mean a bus stop within 400m of each and every property.
Nowadays, it is the ease of access, and quality of provision that is most important, and whilst distance is one factor it is by no means the only, or even the most important. Decision making is based on perception of convenience, and not just distance.
see attached - site 12 land south Dog Kennel Lane
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: 4959
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Lichfields
Policy P15 requires all residential development to meet Building for Life 10 or its equivalent. Please note this is now BFL12 and should be referred to in the policy.
see attached - site 12 land south Dog Kennel Lane
No
Draft Local Plan Review
Q21. Do you agree with the policies health and supporting communities? If not why not, and what alternatives would you suggest?
Representation ID: 4960
Received: 17/02/2017
Respondent: Taylor Wimpey
Agent: Lichfields
Do not consider that it is necessary to prepare an independent Health Impact Assessment where an ES is prepared as this will cover all of the key relevant issues.
see attached - site 12 land south Dog Kennel Lane