Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Search representations

Results for Joy Fook Restaurant search

New search New search

Object

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy DM16: Re-use and Residential Conversions of Rural Buildings

Representation ID: 439

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Joy Fook Restaurant

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

Representation Summary:

This policy must be reviewed in order to ensure that it is consistent with NPPF guidance (paragraph 90). The only tests set out in the NPPF, in relation to the reuse of existing buildings in the Green Belt.

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Comment

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy DM23 Housing Land Allocations - Major Sites

Representation ID: 440

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Joy Fook Restaurant

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

Representation Summary:

JTS takes no issue with the sites identified for residential development in this policy but considers that the Council needs to identify additional land consistent with the approach set out in S2. The Joy Fook restaurant falls in category 3, it is an existing site in the gb, though its not attached to any settlement it is sustiaanble and is well served by public transport, running along Ongar Road, its close proximity to services nad facilties in Kelvedon Hatch, Doddinghurst, Pilgrims Hatch and Brentwood.

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Support

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy DM24: Affordable Housing

Representation ID: 441

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Joy Fook Restaurant

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

Representation Summary:

Whilst we recognise the need to provide affordable housing within the Borough, we welcome the Council's understanding that such provision can potentially impact upon the viability of a scheme. Accordingly, the company welcomes, and supports, the final paragraph of the policy.
We consider that the policy should not seek any affordable housing provision on sites of less than 15 units. On smaller sites (14 units and below) it is often physically, or logistically, difficult, or financial disadvantageous, to include affordable housing on site. These problems become more acute, the smaller
the site gets.

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

Comment

Local Plan 2015-2030 Preferred Options for Consultation

Policy DM29: Accessible, Adaptable Development

Representation ID: 443

Received: 02/10/2013

Respondent: Joy Fook Restaurant

Agent: JTS Partnership LLP

Representation Summary:

As with affordable housing policy DM24, the need to provide 5% Lifetime Homes dwellings, in all new developments of 20 dwellings or more, should be subject to a viability assessment.

Full text:

See Attached

Attachments:

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