Do you support or object to the preferred option for securing affordable homes?
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 199
Received: 12/07/2009
Respondent: Mr Geoffrey Field
Any proposed housing development must be supported with local employment opportunities if people are to avoid costly and environmentally unfriendly travel. Kenilworth has a scarcity of employment opportunities.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 217
Received: 03/07/2009
Respondent: Mrs Caroline Baxter
Object.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 233
Received: 09/07/2009
Respondent: Mr Duncan Hurwood
I think this impossible to achieve, as one cannot know the future housing market when making these decisions. If it is successful, it will only be through luck. It may be better to concentrate on making well built houses, rather than on cheap ones.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 273
Received: 10/07/2009
Respondent: Patricia Robinson
The local area is expensive so better to build affordable housing in cheaper areas e.g. Rugby, Coventry.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 338
Received: 21/07/2009
Respondent: Mr and Mrs D Bolam
Keep the % at 40
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 366
Received: 22/07/2009
Respondent: Peter Pounds
Object.
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 398
Received: 23/07/2009
Respondent: Canon David Tilley
support increase of affordable housing to 50%
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 443
Received: 27/07/2009
Respondent: Peter Clarke
Support.
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 495
Received: 24/07/2009
Respondent: Georgina Wilson
We need to ensure that decent affordable housing is available for the entire workforce and its families.
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 566
Received: 27/07/2009
Respondent: Mr A M Webley
Support.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 629
Received: 23/07/2009
Respondent: Mr G.R. Summers
Object.
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 718
Received: 10/08/2009
Respondent: P.A. Yarwood
Yes.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 747
Received: 06/08/2009
Respondent: West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium
Agent: Tetlow King Planning
It is important that the Council do not rely on Local Plan policy (as indicated at paragraph 10.33) but re-evaluate policy previously adopted to ensure that the evidence base is up to date and policy therefore based on current circumstances. Given the present economic situation it is important that an evaluation of viability is carried out in line with PPS3 guidance to ensure that any target thresholds are not onerous and allow for negotiation and it is therefore strongly recommended that any thresholds are clearly supported by evidence.
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 751
Received: 06/08/2009
Respondent: West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium
Agent: Tetlow King Planning
Affordable housing should be given sufficient weight and status within the core strategy.
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 752
Received: 06/08/2009
Respondent: West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium
Agent: Tetlow King Planning
Credible district wide and sub-district wide affordable housing targets should be set over the plan period.
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 753
Received: 06/08/2009
Respondent: West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium
Agent: Tetlow King Planning
Ensuring that the site size thresholds for negotiating affordable housing from private developers are properly derived in the light of the local housing and land markets. We would anticipate that the Council will consider and articulate the „circumstances‟ across the District which justify any proposed site size thresholds as per relevant government guidance.
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 755
Received: 06/08/2009
Respondent: West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium
Agent: Tetlow King Planning
The opportunities for affordable housing should be maximised in the right locations.
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 757
Received: 06/08/2009
Respondent: West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium
Agent: Tetlow King Planning
The provision of affordable housing is recognised per se as both a positive material planning consideration and a planning benefit.
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 758
Received: 06/08/2009
Respondent: West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium
Agent: Tetlow King Planning
The provision of affordable housing should be viewed within the context of achieving balanced communities and within the wider social exclusion and housing plus agendas.
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 761
Received: 06/08/2009
Respondent: West Midlands RSL Planning Consortium
Agent: Tetlow King Planning
Regular monitoring of the progress in meeting affordable housing needs should take place. PPS3 discusses the requirements of Annual Monitoring Reports and sets out what the LPA should carry out on an annual basis. By referring to such indicators, the success or otherwise of the policies can be measurable against clearly defined targets, allowing measurements to be taken on an annual basis.
Support
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 789
Received: 05/08/2009
Respondent: Faye Davis
Support.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 857
Received: 18/08/2009
Respondent: Adrian Farmer
Percentage figures are OK if the total numbers are accurate and I do not agree that they are
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 921
Received: 19/08/2009
Respondent: Christine Betts
50% affordable housing in new developments is too high. Social engineering to this degree will drive residents out of current homes.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 1003
Received: 24/08/2009
Respondent: Cllr Tim Sawdon
Affordable housing is a 'moveable feast' and the 40% should be more flexibly applied depending on the needs of particular areas.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 1026
Received: 21/08/2009
Respondent: Kirit Marvania
Believe this would devalue area and lead to social and crime problems.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 1089
Received: 21/08/2009
Respondent: Mrs Pamela Beedham
Do not agree with financial contribution to be paid on small sites for affordable housing. Elsewhere more council houses should be built to rent.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 1189
Received: 21/08/2009
Respondent: Barry Elliman
object
Comment
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 1247
Received: 24/08/2009
Respondent: Andrew Horsley
Support
Only if LOCAL young people can buy/part buy houses. See schemes in other areas eg. Carbis Bay, Cornwall where proof of long term residency has to be established before eligibility for purchasing houses, which are reasonably priced.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 1314
Received: 24/08/2009
Respondent: Sarah Jane Horsley
Keep these houses for our LOCALS who have been brought up here and are contributing to our economy. See scheme in Cornwall.
(Carbis Bay) where affordable houses are sold to those on low wages who have lived in the area for years.
Object
Publication Draft
Representation ID: 1381
Received: 18/08/2009
Respondent: Guide Dogs for the Blind Association
Agent: DNS Planning and Design Consultants
We object to the preferred option of 50% affordable housing which is this completely contrary to the current economic climate. The proposal to include the affordability requirement for schemes in excess of 10 dwelling units to 50% requirement will dissuade developers from developing sites. Consequently, this will lead to a housing completions shortfall and Warwick will not be able to meet its housing targets set out in the West Midlands RSS.