Object

Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Representation ID: 22977

Received: 16/03/2020

Respondent: Barratt David Wilson Homes

Agent: Pegasus Planning Group

Representation Summary:

Whilst our client acknowledges the statutory requirement for the Councils’ to promote self-build housing they believe that requiring at least 5% of plots on residential proposals of 40 dwellings or more as serviced self/custom-build plots is not the right approach. Moreover, it is questioned whether the Council’s approach would accord with national policy, specifically paragraph 57-025 of PPG, which outlines that Councils should ‘encourage’ developers to consider self-build and custom housebuilding.

On larger sites the cost of delivering infrastructure can often impact negatively on the percentage of affordable housing that is delivered. A requirement for self-build plots, which generate less revenue for developers than finished homes, has the potential to further reduce the level of affordable housing on these large sites. Our client is committed to the delivery of affordable housing on their site but recognise that for any scheme to come forward it has to be commercially viable. Therefore, they are concerned about the negative impact upon viability that providing 5% of plots as serviced self/custom-build plots on sites of 40 dwellings or more will have on the delivery of affordable housing on sites across the Greater Norwich area. It seems contrary to the Councils’ wider aim to deliver more affordable homes that the needs of people with the financial means to build their own homes could be prioritised over the needs of low earning residents who cannot afford to buy or rent homes in the Greater Norwich area.

Moreover, the need for self-build plots can be often be overstated by self-build registers. In particular, many registers are rarely updated to remove those no longer in need of a self-build plot or to assess whether there is double counting across registers. Given the attractiveness of the Greater Norwich area as a place to live and work there is also the concern that the Councils’ self-build registers have been inflated by people with aspirations to live in the area, meaning that there is an artificially high number of people on the registers compared to neighbouring authorities. With this in mind, it will be important for the Councils to ensure that their evidence on the need for self-build homes has been effectively reviewed if it is to offer a robust position on the demand for this type of development. Especially given the potential number of plots that could be secured across the entire Greater Norwich area on sites of 40 dwellings or more if Policy 5 were adopted. Based on the fact that there are 113 people on the self-build register for the Greater Norwich Area it is likely that the number of plots that will be delivered on sites of 40 dwellings or more will far exceed demand.

Our client believes that rather than targeting major developments the Councils should prioritise self-build plots on the edges of settlements. These more rural locations are predominantly where self-builders would prefer to live rather than on residential estates. It will also mean that sites come forward as and when they are needed based on market demand, rather than in large numbers on larger development sites, which might make them more difficult to market and sell within the 12 months identified in Policy 5. Further comments on how the Councils could achieve this are provided in response to question 47. It is recommended that the Councils prioritise the delivery of self-build plots on the edges of development boundaries where the development of small sites and residential gardens for self-build homes are less likely to result in wider harm. By prioritising self-build plots through Policy 7.5 the Councils will ensure that the development of sites on the edge of development boundaries help to boost the supply of housing, addressing the Councils’ self-build registers and provides a continued source of employment for small builders and tradespeople.

Full text:

For full representation, please refer to the attached documents.