Core Strategy - Consultation Draft
List Comments
56 comments.
| Respondent | Response Date | Details |
|---|---|---|
| Deleted User | 16 Mar 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
The requirement for 82% : 18% split as proposed in the wording should be more flexible so as to permit a wider range of permutations.
The proposed imposition of a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing on sites of less than 15 dwellings (or sites of less than 0.5 ha) is unreasonable.
|
| Deleted User | 15 Mar 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
Proposals for affordable housing should ensure that they make provision for a mix of unit
sizes and tenure and are made available for local people in perpetuity. When considering on-site provision of affordable housing, the HCA wishes to see appropriate
levels of integration.
|
| Deleted User | 15 Mar 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
The proposed imposition of a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing on sites of less than 15 dwellings (or sites of less than 0.5 ha) is unreasonable. The requirement for the 1.5 B jobs per dwelling (or any amendment thereof) should be specifically stated as not applying to the affordable housing element.
|
| Deleted User | 11 Mar 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
The requirement for 82% : 18% split as proposed in the wording should be more flexible so as to permit a wider range of permutations.
The proposed imposition of a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing on sites of less than 15 dwellings (or sites of less than 0.5 ha) is unreasonable.
|
| Deleted User | 10 Mar 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
The requirement for 82% : 18% split as proposed in the wording should be more flexible so as to permit a wider range of permutations.
The proposed imposition of a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing on sites of less than 15 dwellings (or sites of less than 0.5 ha) is unreasonable.
|
| Deleted User | 03 Mar 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
The requirement for 82% : 18% split as proposed in the wording should be more flexible so as to permit a wider range of permutations.
Further guidance should be stated upon the basis of viability analysis to be required by the Council. A maximum % of on-site provision should be included - it is suggested 30% in the absence of any such reasoned proposal from the Council.
|
| Deleted User | 02 Mar 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
The requirement for 82% : 18% split as proposed in the wording should be more flexible so as to permit a wider range of permutations. This is potentially too prescriptive to cover all circumstances. The presumption that provision should be "without the need for public subsidy" is not reasonable and these words should be deleted. Further guidance should be stated upon the basis of viability analysis to be required by the Council.
|
| Deleted User | 26 Feb 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
It is difficult to comment on this policy without having seen the council's viability appraisal. The council should explore setting lower affordable housing thresholds in rural areas, whereas 15 units appears to be appropriate in Weston-super-Mare. In accordance with the emerging RSS we consider that the council should set a target of 35% for affordable housing. Urban extensions should be able to carry higher levels of affordable housing and individual targets should be set for each site.
|
| Deleted User | 25 Feb 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
NSC approach of none delivery of Bristol SW SUE would result in the loss of 3,675 affordable houses within the plan period. This policy is unsustainable and damaging to the social well being those people who are in greatest need of such housing. Whilst the political will of NSC may wish to retain Green Belt it must give greater weight to properly meeting the needs of its wider community.
|
| Deleted User | 24 Feb 2010 | Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing
The proposed imposition of a financial contribution towards the provision of affordable housing on sites of less than 15 dwellings (or sites of less than 0.5ha) is unreasonable and should be deleted. The requirement for the 1.5 B jobs per dwelling (or any amendment thereof) should be specifically stated as not applying to the affordable housing element.
|