Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Search representations

Results for Hopkins Homes, Persimmon Homes and Taylor Wimpey search

New search New search

Comment

Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Question 27: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to approach to affordable homes?

Representation ID: 21188

Received: 16/03/2020

Respondent: Hopkins Homes, Persimmon Homes and Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Flexibility should be provided within the Policy to deviate from the stated percentages, should unforeseen circumstances arise that threaten the viability of a site, or where there are changes in the most up-to-date evidence of need. In this regard, the Policy should delete reference to the words ‘at least’ as affordable housing requirements should not be expressed as minimums.

Full text:

Flexibility should be provided within the Policy to deviate from the stated percentages, should unforeseen circumstances arise that threaten the viability of a site, or where there are changes in the most up-to-date evidence of need. In this regard, the Policy should delete reference to the words ‘at least’ as affordable housing requirements should not be expressed as minimums.

Comment

Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Question 28: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to space standards?

Representation ID: 21189

Received: 16/03/2020

Respondent: Hopkins Homes, Persimmon Homes and Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

In accordance with PPG requirements, space standards should only be introduced where there is robust evidence to demonstrate that they are required. The evidence referenced within the draft Plan indicates that, in fact, 75% of homes in Greater Norwich were delivered to the necessary standards between 2016-2018, which calls into question the need for a policy requiring strict adherence.

Notwithstanding the above, the policy should include flexibility in its wording to allow delivery of homes that are below the space standards, where they are well-designed and meet specific needs.

Full text:

In accordance with PPG requirements, space standards should only be introduced where there is robust evidence to demonstrate that they are required. The evidence referenced within the draft Plan indicates that, in fact, 75% of homes in Greater Norwich were delivered to the necessary standards between 2016-2018, which calls into question the need for a policy requiring strict adherence.

Notwithstanding the above, the policy should include flexibility in its wording to allow delivery of homes that are below the space standards, where they are well-designed and meet specific needs.

Object

Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Question 32: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the approach to Self/Custom-Build?

Representation ID: 21190

Received: 16/03/2020

Respondent: Hopkins Homes, Persimmon Homes and Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

The proposal to require ll developments of 40+ dwellings to provide 5% of plots as serviced self/custom build plots is considered inappropriate and unjustified. The proposed policy will result in a level of supply which significantly exceeds the demand. Furthermore, particularly for the larger sites, it will have a significant impact on continuity in delivery, which is critical for both the developers and for the Councils in ensuring they are able to maintain a 5-year land supply.

Full text:

The proposal to require all developments of 40+ dwellings to provide 5% of plots as serviced self/custom build plots is considered inappropriate and unjustified. The supporting text indicates that at present there are 113 people on the Self Build Register in the Greater Norwich Area. The proposed policy will result in a level of supply which significantly exceeds the demand. Furthermore, particularly for the larger sites, it will have a significant impact on continuity in delivery, which is critical for both the developers and for the Councils in ensuring they are able to maintain a 5-year land supply.

In addition, it may make it difficult to achieve a well-integrated development from a design perspective.

Self/Custom Build plots should be secured on a site-by-site basis, dependent on local need at the time of the development, or alternatively an exception site approach could be taken to stimulate supply.

Support

Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Question 40. Do you support or object or wish to comment on the approach for elsewhere in the urban area including the fringe parishes? Please identify particular issues.

Representation ID: 21191

Received: 16/03/2020

Respondent: Hopkins Homes, Persimmon Homes and Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

We strongly support the proposed allocation of an additional 1200 dwellings (minimum) at White House Farm, Sprowston. The site has previously been demonstrated, through earlier Representations and a Delivery Statement, to be suitable, available and viable for up to 1350 dwellings, and the Consortium have an excellent track-record of delivery in the immediate area. The site is highly sustainable and a logical location for further growth, being well-related to services and employment opportunities. This allocation will provide continuity in delivery for the three housebuilders, and assist in providing an appropriate buffer to safeguard against any potential under-delivery of other sites.

Full text:

We strongly support the proposed allocation of an additional 1200 dwellings (minimum) at White House Farm, Sprowston. The site has previously been demonstrated, through earlier Representations and a Delivery Statement, to be suitable, available and viable for up to 1350 dwellings, and the Consortium have an excellent track-record of delivery in the immediate area. The site is highly sustainable and a logical location for further growth, being well-related to services and employment opportunities. This allocation will provide continuity in delivery for the three housebuilders, and assist in providing an appropriate buffer to safeguard against any potential under-delivery of other sites.

Comment

Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Question 48. Do you support or object or wish to comment any other aspect of the draft plan not covered in other questions? This includes the appendices below. Please identify particular issues.

Representation ID: 21194

Received: 16/03/2020

Respondent: Hopkins Homes, Persimmon Homes and Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

Interim Viability Study - concerns regarding lack of consideration of strategic-scale sites (i.e 1000+ dwellings).

CIL Review - comments regarding viability must be accepted on the basis of the current regime, and the outcome of the CIL Review may have significant implications for viability.

Full text:

The Consortium have reviewed the Interim Viability Study (November 2019) and have a number of comments. Of particular concern is the lack of consideration given to strategic-scale sites (i.e. 1000+ dwellings). The largest scale development typology is 600 units, which is significantly smaller than the scale of development proposed on a number of sites, including site GNLP0132, and therefore not a reliable or robust comparator. Furthermore, no allowance is included for the provision of strategic infrastructure on larger sites.

In addition, the timing of the CIL Review is such that any comments regarding viability must be accepted on the basis of the current regime, and the outcome of the CIL Review may have significant implications on viability, and this must be acknowledged by the Councils.

Support

Draft Greater Norwich Local Plan – Part 1 The Strategy

Question 19: Do you support, object or have any comments relating to the specific requirements of the policy?

Representation ID: 21199

Received: 16/03/2020

Respondent: Hopkins Homes, Persimmon Homes and Taylor Wimpey

Agent: Bidwells

Representation Summary:

This policy approach is supported, and accords with the NPPF.

Full text:

This policy approach is supported, and accords with the NPPF.

For instructions on how to use the system and make comments, please see our help guide.