MM39
Object
Schedule of Potential Main Modifications
Representation ID: 29895
Received: 26/11/2021
Respondent: Philip Cunliffe-Jones
Legally compliant? No
Sound? No
The first criterion in revised Policy HP05-Paragraph D introduced by MM39 is too absolute. It is always possible for dwellings to be acquired by a Registered Social Provider, including the Council , but it may not be practicable for providers to manage especially in the case of a small number and the financial negotiations can also lead to an impasse.
See attached
Object
Schedule of Potential Main Modifications
Representation ID: 30066
Received: 29/11/2021
Respondent: CEG Land Promotions Limited
Agent: Lichfields
Legally compliant? Yes
Sound? No
Supports replacing SHMA reference with “housing evidence”. However, the policy needs to be more flexible for larger strategic sites which have specific challenges associated with delivering homes across multiple phases over the plan period. The current wording applies the tenure split too rigidly. For these developments, the policy needs to consider when infrastructure is delivered, viability, and the overall tenure split for the site as each plot comes forward. DHGV will be delivered up-to and post 2033. Hence there is a need to consider and account for potential for changes to the housing needs over such a long period.
See attached.