Cymraeg
4.11 Conclusion
Object
Review Report
Representation ID: 27159
Received: 22/12/2017
Respondent: Home Builders Federation Ltd
There is no comment on the fact that some of the previously allocated sites may have in fact been the wrong sites to allocate, particularly any rolled over from previous plans.
No account taken of the issues identified in the WG Longitudinal and Viability study regarding site viability and deliverability.
There has been no discussion about one of the other factors which has affected the provision of housing, which is around the suitability of the sites allocated. Although it is accepted that the allocated sites went through a degree of scrutiny as part of their allocation in the LDP, the recent WG study entitled 'Longitudinal Viability Study of the Planning Process' has highlighted the need to look at deliverability and viability far more closely than it has been in previous LDP's. The HBF would request an additional paragraph which refers to this study and looks at the issues from the report referred to above in more detail thus giving a more balance view.
Noted. This will be considered as part of the LDP Review.
Comment
Review Report
Representation ID: 27187
Received: 21/12/2017
Respondent: Dwr Cymru Welsh Water
We note that the Review will need to reconsider both the scale and distribution of growth proposed, and that the capacity of settlements to absorb additional employment and residential development will need to be assessed in light of the evidence to be collected through the Review. Since the LDP was adopted in 2013 it will be necessary for us to reassess the capacity of our infrastructure to accommodate growth.
See attached document.
Noted.
Support
Review Report
Representation ID: 27188
Received: 21/12/2017
Respondent: FCC Environmental (UK) Limited
Agent: Axis
The review should consider larger scale windfall developments and allocations within and adjacent to Tier 1 Villages in order to achieve shortfalls in the Rural Development Strategy Areas (RDSA) identified in paragraph 4.5.
See attached document.
Noted. Housing policies will be re-assessed as part of the LDP Review process.
Object
Review Report
Representation ID: 27207
Received: 22/12/2017
Respondent: Anwyl Construction Ltd
Agent: P L Planning
Rather than the Review Report using language which suggests a need to reduce the housing supply the Council should be taking positive and continuing steps to enable delivery of housing, including in a replacement LDP.
Additional, suitable, viable land attractive to the market in sustainable places where people want to live is available and capable of contributing to housing delivery.
See attached document.
Noted. Housing requirements and supply levels will be re-assessed as part of the Review process.
Object
Review Report
Representation ID: 27212
Received: 22/12/2017
Respondent: Anwyl Construction Ltd
Agent: P L Planning
There is no mention of the suitability of sites allocated for housing in the plan or indeed their potential to become available. For example there has been subsequent research on the need to look at deliverability and viability far more closely than in previously LDPs (WG study 'Longitudinal Viability Study of the Planning Process').
Furthermore case studies (including in Conwy) suggest permissions not being released as a result of delays in signing S106 agreements.
See attached document.
Accepted. As part of the LDP review, candidate sites will be required to demonstrate viability and deliverability before being allocated. The conclusion will be expanded to reflect this.
Object
Review Report
Representation ID: 27225
Received: 22/12/2017
Respondent: Beech Developments (NW) Ltd
Agent: P L Planning
Rather than the Review Report using language which suggests a need to reduce the housing supply the Council should be taking positive and continuing steps to enable delivery of housing, including in a replacement LDP.
Additional, suitable, viable land attractive to the market in sustainable places where people want to live is available and capable of contributing to housing delivery.
See attached document.
Noted. Housing requirements and supply levels will be re-assessed as part of the Review process.
Object
Review Report
Representation ID: 27230
Received: 22/12/2017
Respondent: Beech Developments (NW) Ltd
Agent: P L Planning
There is no mention of the suitability of sites allocated for housing in the plan or indeed their potential to become available. For example there has been subsequent research on the need to look at deliverability and viability far more closely than in previously LDPs (WG study 'Longitudinal Viability Study of the Planning Process').
Furthermore case studies (including in Conwy) suggest permissions not being released as a result of delays in signing S106 agreements.
See attached document.
Accepted. As part of the LDP review, candidate sites will be required to demonstrate viability and deliverability before being allocated. The conclusion will be expanded to reflect this.
Object
Review Report
Representation ID: 27243
Received: 22/12/2017
Respondent: Macbryde Homes Ltd
Agent: P L Planning
Rather than the Review Report using language which suggests a need to reduce the housing supply the Council should be taking positive and continuing steps to enable delivery of housing, including in a replacement LDP.
Additional, suitable, viable land attractive to the market in sustainable places where people want to live is available and capable of contributing to housing delivery.
See attached document.
Noted. Housing requirements and supply levels will be re-assessed as part of the Review process.
Object
Review Report
Representation ID: 27248
Received: 22/12/2017
Respondent: Macbryde Homes Ltd
Agent: P L Planning
There is no mention of the suitability of sites allocated for housing in the plan or indeed their potential to become available. For example there has been subsequent research on the need to look at deliverability and viability far more closely than in previously LDPs (WG study 'Longitudinal Viability Study of the Planning Process').
Furthermore case studies (including in Conwy) suggest permissions not being released as a result of delays in signing S106 agreements.
See attached document.
Accepted. As part of the LDP review, candidate sites will be required to demonstrate viability and deliverability before being allocated. The conclusion will be expanded to reflect this.