Review Report

Search representations

Results for Home Builders Federation Ltd search

New search New search

Object

Review Report

7.6

Representation ID: 27168

Received: 22/12/2017

Respondent: Home Builders Federation Ltd

Representation Summary:

The HBF objects to some of the wording as it is wrong to say that it is the changes to TAN1 which have caused the under delivery of new homes, TAN1 is only a way of measuring the genuinely available land, it does not have an impact on the actual delivery of homes.
Additional wording is required in light of the Ministers recent statement regarding LDP's and the need for them to move forward jointly.

Full text:

The HBF objects to some of the wording as it is wrong to say that it is the changes to TAN1 which have caused the under delivery of new homes, TAN1 is only a way of measuring the genuinely available land, it does not have an impact on the actual delivery of homes.
Additional wording is required in light of the Ministers recent statement regarding LDP's and the need for them to move forward jointly.


Our response:

Not Accepted

Object

Review Report

8.1

Representation ID: 27169

Received: 22/12/2017

Respondent: Home Builders Federation Ltd

Representation Summary:

HBF object to the suggestion that the housing number should be reduced to a level which will ensure delivery, as this would be contrary to national guidance. The housing level should be set as a result of the identified need and any additional aspiration for growth which the Council may identify. Ensuring the right sites are allocated and that they are deliverable taking account of the impact of the plans policies is the issue.

Full text:

The HBF are concerned that the wording of this paragraph suggests that the only way to deliver more homes is to ask for less in the first place. The housing provision should be set taking account of the identified need as a starting point as advised in PPW, and then making adjustments to allow for any economic or other aspirations which are linked to the need for housing, the wider North Wales Growth Deal is relevant for instance. It would be wrong for the plan to set the housing need at a level just to give a better chance of being able to deliver the numbers particularly if this is based on historical build rates. What is more important is to ensure that the sites allocated are the right ones and can be delivered and that other policies do not affect this deliverability.


Our response:

Noted.

Comment

Review Report

3.3

Representation ID: 27170

Received: 22/12/2017

Respondent: Home Builders Federation Ltd

Representation Summary:

The HBF suggest that this would be a good point to include a reference to the potential impact of the North Wales Growth Deal and its ambitions for economic growth which will need to be matched by the provision of new homes in the right locations. There doesn't appear to be any mention of it anywhere else in the document.

Full text:

The HBF suggest that this would be a good point to include a reference to the potential impact of the North Wales Growth Deal and its ambitions for economic growth which will need to be matched by the provision of new homes in the right locations. There doesn't appear to be any mention of it anywhere else in the document.


Our response:

Accepted. The North Wales Growth Bid submission post-dated the LDP Review Report but details will be included in the revised Review Report.

Object

Review Report

4.4

Representation ID: 27171

Received: 22/12/2017

Respondent: Home Builders Federation Ltd

Representation Summary:

The current commentary on windfall sites is one sides and does not include a number of the factors that could have an effect on the level of windfall development.

Full text:

The HBF do not consider that this paragraph on windfall's currently provides all sides of the story. There are many factors which could affect the level of windfall development, firstly the windfall level could have been set at an unrealistic level so was never going to be achieved. Secondly by their nature there is not an unlimited supply of windfall sites and no guarantee of when they will come forward so their availability is likely to reduce over time, both of these points should be included within the paragraph. Further if it is just down to small sites as explained in the paragraph it would help to provide some data to support this.


Our response:

Noted. All housing requirements and sources of supply will be re-assessed as part of the LDP Review process.

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