Core Strategy - Consultation Draft

List Comments

Search for Comments

Response Type
Order By
in order

56 comments.

List of comments
RespondentResponse DateDetails
Mr D Breeze 16 Feb 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing

  • Comment ID: 3320065/CSCD/5
  • Status: Accepted
Affordable housing targets should be just that and not a debatable moving feast ultimately leading to delay and additional costs. Small sites below the thresholds should not be subject to viability testing or financial contributions for affordable housing provision.
Deleted User 16 Feb 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing

  • Comment ID: 1078849/CSCD/5
  • Status: Accepted
It is rare for Congresbury to have viable sites that can actually hold 15 dwellings; this could mean that the village never gets an allocation of affordable homes via developers. Congresbury Parish Council would welcome a lower threshold of 5 dwellings as a trigger for on-site contributions.
Deleted User 01 Feb 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing

  • Comment ID: 2884417/CSCD/1
  • Status: Accepted
The Council's approach to seeking affordable housing beyond the target of 30% is contrary to national planning policy guidance and is therefore considered to be unsound.
Tom Leimdorfer 27 Jan 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing

  • Comment ID: 936033/CSCD/7
  • Status: Accepted
There needs to be a more robust approach to achieving affordable housing targets. The standard should be 33%. Where there is strong local support and in some rural areas, higher percentage can apply. For example, in the Elliott's site proposal, it would be argued that the employment part of the development will support only 24 open market dwellings, hence the other 16 (or 40%) should be affordable housing. In general, in rural areas the threshold should be 6 (yielding 2 affordable).
Deleted User 25 Jan 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing

  • Comment ID: 1007489/CSCD/1
  • Status: Accepted
There is no longer 'affordable' housing. Low income villagers in need are no longer sufficient in numbers to justify new affordable developments as set out in current policies. Any available infill sites are developed by executive housing. Village demographic profiles are skewed heavily towards high income groups. Village schools continue only because they have an imported scholar population of up to 70%; but these children and their parents do not contribute to that village life and community.
Deleted User 17 Jan 2010

Core Strategy - Consultation Draft Chapter 3: Spatial Policies Delivering Strong and Inclusive Communities CS16: Affordable Housing CS16: Affordable Housing

  • Comment ID: 3164577/CSCD/11
  • Status: Accepted
Public subsidy is given to support affordable housing schemes, even if no subsidy is provided to the developer who builds it, so to imply that there is no cost to the public is misleading.
First pagePrevious page