Suggest point 1 references exceptions within point 3. Point 3 (a) provides some flexibility but is still considered too rigid to enable sites to quickly adapt to evolving housing demands.

Point 1 suggests new market and affordable homes must be delivered in line with the HEDNA. However, point 3 then provides exceptions – it is suggested point 1 references point 3 to avoid confusion.
More generally, we support providing a mix of homes of differing size, types and tenures to meet a range of local needs. However, any such policy has to be flexible enough to recognise the range of needs locally and the specifics of the site and its context. Relying solely on the HEDNA and infrequently published updates to it does not fully provide this flexibility and would not allow home builders to respond effectively to changing market conditions over the plan period, which in the current economic and political climate, can occur quickly. It also does not recognise that, within the district, and particularly on large sites such as West of Chichester, circumstances may exist which require a less prescriptive approach to housing mix on site. Furthermore, the financial viability of providing a given mix also has to be considered and allowed for in any policy wording to reflect that, particularly on larger sites, too heavy a weighting on any particular size of houses can have significant viability implications. The provisions of point 3(a) provide some flexibility but is still considered too rigid to enable sites to quickly adapt to evolving housing demands.