Sites and Policies Plan Consultation Draft

Document Section Sites and Policies Plan Consultation Draft Older and Vulnerable People DM40-43 [View all comments on this section]
Comment ID 4209249//8
Respondent Deleted User [View all comments by this respondent]
Agent Deleted User
Response Date 19 Apr 2013
Current Status Accepted
Comment

Policy DM40 Retirement Accommodation and Supported Independent Living for Older and Vulnerable People

Persimmon Homes object to Policy DM40 Retirement Accommodation.

Whilst Persimmon Homes note that the needs of an ageing population need to be taken into account by the planning process, Policy DM40, as drafted, is unclear and imprecise.

The policy states the provision of accommodation aimed at achieving various degrees of independent living for older or vulnerable people will be required on all residential planning developments over 100 dwellings.

It is unclear from the policy and the supporting text what is to be provided and when. This is inconsistent with the NPPF and thus unsound. It should not be an absolute requirement on all sites over 100 dwellings.  The issue should be considered on a site by site basis as not all sites or locations will be suitable for provision of such accommodation.

Furthermore, the relationship to Policy DM35 should be clarified. There is an element of policy duplication on this point.

 Change Sought to the Plan

That Policy DM40 be revised to overcome the above objection.

 

 

 

Policy DM42 Lifetime Homes

Persimmon Homes object to Policy DM42 Lifetime Homes.

The policy, as drafted, requires all new build residential developments over 10 dwellings to be constructed to Lifetime Homes standards. Whilst a proportion of a new development could be constructed to the Lifetime Homes standards, including the social housing element of a development, it is unreasonable to expect all new developments over 10 dwellings to be constructed to the Lifetime Homes standards.

Clearly, there should be a range and mix of house types, in accordance with DM35. However, design innovation should not be stifled by an overly restrictive, inflexible and somewhat arbitrary policy requirement to design all new homes, on schemes over 10 dwellings, as Lifetime Homes, contrary to the NPPF. 

This policy requirement could potentially restrict the delivery of housing in North Somerset.

The policy should not undermine the viability of development. The policy should be consistent with the NPPF.

Change Sought to the Plan

That Policy DM42 be revised to overcome the above objection.

Attachments