Policy DM4: Affordable Housing Exception Sites
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 50
Received: 04/01/2019
Respondent: Mr Stephen Jupp
This policy fails to follow / include the policy for 'entry-level exception sites' as set out in para 71 of the Framework.
This policy fails to follow / include the policy for 'entry-level exception sites' as set out in para 71 of the Framework.
Support
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 760
Received: 01/02/2019
Respondent: Mrs Stephanie Carn
Small developments of affordable and social housing are needed, especially in small villages.
Small developments of affordable and social housing are needed, especially in small villages.
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 841
Received: 02/02/2019
Respondent: Mrs Fiona Horn
There is no mention of mitigation of transport issues.Unless this is adequately addressed in future iterations of the plan, i will raise this with the inspector at the appropriate time.
There is no mention of mitigation of transport issues.Unless this is adequately addressed in future iterations of the plan, i will raise this with the inspector at the appropriate time.
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 1611
Received: 07/02/2019
Respondent: Mr Thomas Procter
Paragraph 7.29 and Policy DM4 Conflict directly with the 2018 NPPF definition of affordable housing.
Paragraph 7.29 and Policy DM4 Conflict directly with the 2018 NPPF definition of affordable housing. The NPPF definition allows the building of various types of Affordable housing without them being "Registered Provider, Community Land Trust or other Approved Body". The conditions for affordable housing on exception sites is set out in the NPPF and CDC planning documents are obliged to follow National Policy and should be modified to reflect that. Rural Exception and Entry Level Exception sites are not required to be a "Registered Provider, Community Land Trust or other Approved Body" as this would preclude various types of housing that could not be provided under this obligation including build to rent, starter homes, discounted market sale housing, rent to buy, self build and so on which are all defined as affordable housing under the NPPF.
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 2927
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: CPRE Sussex
We strongly support significant inclusion of affordable housing in the plan, but this is not strong enough as a general policy.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3099
Received: 06/02/2019
Respondent: Chichester Harbour Conservancy
Page 141, 7.34 Affordable Housing Exception Sites:
The term "exceptional circumstances" is too vague.
See attachment
Comment
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3202
Received: 04/02/2019
Respondent: Mrs Sarah Sharp
7.35 This "local connection" policy should be amended to include step-children step relationships. Some people only have step-children and are prevented from settling near them as this is not seen as a sufficient relationship.
See attachment
Support
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3279
Received: 29/01/2019
Respondent: Westbourne Parish Council
Support policy.
Has any consideration been given to allowing self-builds or building a couple of properties on exception sites at market price as a revenue model to facilitate the delivery of affordable houses through the CLT?
See attachment
Object
Local Plan Review: Preferred Approach 2016-2035
Representation ID: 3531
Received: 05/02/2019
Respondent: Mr Alan Carn
Small developments of affordable and social housing are essential, particularly in rural communities.
See attachment