Home > Planning > Planning Policy

PLEASE NOTE: You only need to register / login if you wish to make representations.

You can view the full details of a representation by clicking either on the Representation ID in the top right of the summary box or on the More Details... link at the bottom.

Representations on BMSDC Joint Local Plan Consultation Document (Interactive) - Option AH1

Representation ID: 13138

SUPPORT Councillor Frank Lawrenson

Summary:

I support Options AH1 which will require affordable housing.

More details about Rep ID: 13138

Representation ID: 12523

OBJECT Stoke by Nayland Parish Council (Mr James Dark)

Summary:

It is recommended that development of any size in the AONBs should provide suitably for affordable housing

More details about Rep ID: 12523

Representation ID: 11926

SUPPORT Pigeon Investmenrt Management (Mr. Andrew Fillmore) represented by Beacon Planning Ltd (Ms Sophie Pain)

Summary:

Pigeon would support the Council's approach to Affordable Housing as set out in Option AH1, albeit the actual level of provision required on residential developments needs to be set at a level which balances needs with scheme viability. Setting levels too high could actually reduce the delivery of affordable housing by reducing the attractiveness to land owners and developers to bring forward land for new homes.

More details about Rep ID: 11926

Representation ID: 11863

SUPPORT Dedham Vale Society (Mr. David Eking)

Summary:

We support Options HM1, AH1 and RE1.

More details about Rep ID: 11863

Representation ID: 10536

COMMENT Rentplus represented by Tetlow King Planning (Meghan Rossiter)

Summary:

We concur that Option AH1 is appropriate and does not require alternatives, however the final definition of the policy should consider including specific reference to a range of affordable housing tenures, including rent to buy as this model is specifically encouraged by the Government and aims to 'plug the gap' left by other housing tenures.

The delivery of rent to buy housing reduces the pressure on other affordable housing, freeing up social rented and affordable rented housing for those with greater priority needs.

More details about Rep ID: 10536

Representation ID: 9110

COMMENT Mr Guy McGregor

Summary:

Affordable Housing is a difficult problem

More details about Rep ID: 9110

Representation ID: 9003

SUPPORT Mrs Jessica Fleming

Summary:

Affordalbe housing mix is important to meet local need

More details about Rep ID: 9003

Representation ID: 8550

COMMENT Mr Michael Beiley

Summary:

Serious consideration should be given to the use of Mobile / Prefabricated homes - they are affordable,quick to build / erect , less obtrusive as single storey and suitable for the elderly/disabled.

More details about Rep ID: 8550

Representation ID: 8513

SUPPORT SHOTLEY PARISH COUNCIL (Mrs Dina Bedwell)

Summary:

We agree that the proportion of affordable housing being proposed is adequate.

More details about Rep ID: 8513

Representation ID: 7728

SUPPORT Mx Miles Row

Summary:

Affordable and social housing are essential.

More details about Rep ID: 7728

Representation ID: 7572

COMMENT Mr Peter Powell

Summary:

35% affordable needed

More details about Rep ID: 7572

Representation ID: 7431

COMMENT Ms Helen Davies

Summary:

The %'s suggested have been reduced from the previous requirement 35% to 20% even though the requirement for affordable housing has appeared to increase. Developers are constantly arguing and manipulating viability as an argument to reduce the affordable contribution required. BDC have to ask for what is needed and stick with it. If there is actually a 35% need for affordable housing then surely that should be applied to any development of 3 or more homes as that is the point 35% becomes achievable.

More details about Rep ID: 7431

Representation ID: 7187

SUPPORT Mrs Cindy Hughes

Summary:

Yes, a percentage should be reserved for affordable housing - Developers must not be allowed to lower this percentage once its been agreed

More details about Rep ID: 7187

Representation ID: 6978

COMMENT Mr & Mrs Martin Steele

Summary:

All developments over 10 houses should provide a mix of property types and naturally affordable housing should form a percentage of that.

More details about Rep ID: 6978

Representation ID: 6374

SUPPORT Barham Parish Council (Mrs Joanne Culley)

Summary:

A proportion of affordable housing is essential.

More details about Rep ID: 6374

Representation ID: 6312

COMMENT Freston Parish Council (Ms Elizabeth Aldous)

Summary:

no comment

More details about Rep ID: 6312

Representation ID: 6216

OBJECT Mr Keith Lansdown

Summary:

The level of affordable housing needs to be maintained at 35% and far more rigorously enforced. The needs of the community need to come above lining developers pockets.

More details about Rep ID: 6216

Representation ID: 6108

SUPPORT Mr Colin Johnston

Summary:

The problem still remains that affordable housing is often not affordable! 'Sustainable' and 'affordable' are just meaningless words which politicians hope the public will interpret in a positive light. What we need is more truly affordable rented homes for people on low incomes and that means social housing which the government is not promoting. At the end of the day housing policy comes from central government and its rules do not promote the local housing strategies which will address need.

More details about Rep ID: 6108

Representation ID: 6038

SUPPORT Stowmarket Society (Mr Michael Smith)

Summary:

In broad terms it seems the planning system is failing to deliver the amount of affordable housing that we need. Time and again we read of normal affordable housing requirements being set aside because of alleged viability issues. Local authorities and Inspectors are put in an impossible position trying to judge these issues with all of the information being held by the applicant. We suspect that if the AH requirement were clear and firm, many of these viability issues would disappear.

More details about Rep ID: 6038

Representation ID: 5731

COMMENT Paul Hales Associates (Mr. Paul Hales)

Summary:

OptionAH1 of setting a requirement for affordable housing seems an appropriate approach provided it is made clear that the requirement is subject to viability testing on an individual site based on it's merits.

More details about Rep ID: 5731

Representation ID: 5527

COMMENT Pinewood Parish Council (Mrs Sandra Peartree)

Summary:

Agree

More details about Rep ID: 5527

Representation ID: 4607

SUPPORT Woolverstone Parish Council (Mr Simon Pearce)

Summary:

Support

More details about Rep ID: 4607

Representation ID: 4339

COMMENT Mrs Louise Baldry

Summary:

35% affordable housing is required and should be enforced to reduce the percentage increase of rentals we need to support those who need it not the greedy developers. Starter homes are greatly required also and should be considered

More details about Rep ID: 4339

Representation ID: 4251

SUPPORT Mr Jeremy Doncaster

Summary:

Starter homes should also be added into this mix. Sold at a discount of at least 20% below market value with a maximum sale cost of £250,000

More details about Rep ID: 4251

Representation ID: 3996

SUPPORT Sudbury Town Council (Mrs Jacqueline Howells)

Summary:

Sudbury Town Council supports AH1 and recommends a target of 35% of developments should be affordable housing.

More details about Rep ID: 3996

Representation ID: 3950

OBJECT Mr John Bellwood

Summary:

Having a strategy is only relevant if developers cannot appeal later in the planning and construction process and have the requirement reduced or removed.

Although this appears to be the appropriate policy the %'s suggested have been reduced from the previous requirement 35% to 20% even though the requirement has appeared to increase. BDC have to ask for what is needed and have the courage to stick with it or we will end up with houses built that only investors can afford and the expanding resident population will end up having to rent them.

More details about Rep ID: 3950

Representation ID: 3576

COMMENT Mr Richard Howard

Summary:

The total need for affordable house suggested 19.4%, this is a drop from the previous policy of 35% in the face of a 71% local increase in private rentals ie homes being bought up and rented to people who cannot afford to buy a home, an increase in single parents looking for homes and an increase in local financial deprivation, this just doesn't stack up.

More details about Rep ID: 3576

Representation ID: 2953

SUPPORT Wortham & Burgate Parish Council (mrs Netty Verkroost)

Summary:

There is a lack of affordable housing in this area.

More details about Rep ID: 2953

Representation ID: 2878

SUPPORT Mr Andrew Coxhead

Summary:

Support

More details about Rep ID: 2878

Representation ID: 2534

SUPPORT Mr Terry Corner

Summary:

Agree

More details about Rep ID: 2534

Representation ID: 2391

SUPPORT Chelmondiston PC (Mrs Rosie Kirkup)

Summary:

We agree with AH1, however financial viability testing should be conducted prior to the application being granted permission. Too often we see planning authorities permitting developers to renege on supplying "affordable" housing as it is deemed not financially viable.

More details about Rep ID: 2391

Representation ID: 1703

SUPPORT Battisford Parish Council (Mr Chris Knock)

Summary:

More details about Rep ID: 1703

Representation ID: 1165

OBJECT Mr Graham Shorrock

Summary:

Forcing developers to include a proportion of affordable housing that are sold at less than market value will result in all other houses being increased in price.

More details about Rep ID: 1165

Representation ID: 1126

SUPPORT Great Ashfield PC (arthur peake)

Summary:

agreed

More details about Rep ID: 1126

Representation ID: 857

COMMENT Mr Michael Morley

Summary:

Having a strategy is only relevant if developers cannot appeal later in the planning and construction process and have the requirement reduced or removed

More details about Rep ID: 857

Representation ID: 183

SUPPORT Mr D C Warren

Summary:

Local young people must be supported and suitable housing must be provided

More details about Rep ID: 183

Having trouble using the system? Visit our help page or contact us directly.

Powered by OpusConsult