Object

Representation ID: 25629

Received: 12/03/2019

Respondent: Alice Martin

15% outside of Garden Suburb seems ridiculously low and cannot see how this complies with NPPF para 61. Last sentence should be deleted. Affordable housing providers make their housing distinguishable by adding their own parking and house signs (see Ravenswood)

Support

Representation ID: 25682

Received: 11/03/2019

Respondent: Rentplus UK Ltd

Since the Issues and Options stage, the Government has revised the National Planning Policy Framework, "including a new, widened definition of affordable housing which includes at Annex 2 a definition of 'other affordable routes to home ownership', as recognised in the supporting text to Policy CS12. The incorporation of rent to buy within the NPPF and this policy enables the Council to embrace this tenure as a clear part of the response to local housing needs.

Support

Representation ID: 25713

Received: 04/03/2019

Respondent: Suffolk Chamber of Commerce

We are pleased with the Council's aim of delivering at least 8,622 dwellings and we hope the appropriate provision will be given for a mix of housing, including high-quality family housing and housing for people on lower incomes.

Support

Representation ID: 25821

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Cardinal Lofts (Mill) Ltd

The Company welcomes the acknowledge that, in some cases, due to high cost of development and 'abnormals' relating to a site, it may not always be viable to provide full provision (as set out in the policy), or any, affordable housing.

It is understood that the Council will shortly be progressing with its proposed Community Infrastructure Levy. This will place additional financial burdens upon development and, in some circumstances, reduce the amount of affordable housing that can be provided (on viability grounds).

Object

Representation ID: 25844

Received: 12/03/2019

Respondent: Ravenswood Environmental Group

The NPPF states that at least 10% of the affordable housing percentage should be discounted market housing. That means that where a Council is proposing 15% affordable housing then the 10% falls entirely within that. Policy CS12 is contrary to paragraph 64 and footnote 29 of the NPPF.
The Council is asking that "at least 15%" affordable housing should be provided on major development sites. No justification as to why "at least" is used. This is a huge "developer cost" so why is there no mandatory level of affordable housing in the Local Plan as per other Local Plans?

Support

Representation ID: 25881

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Associated British Ports

ABP notes the requirement for major new development (10+ dwellings) to provide 15% affordable housing and welcomes the flexibility within the wording of Policy CS12 both in respect of the proportion of affordable housing and tenure mix where development viability justifies it.

Object

Representation ID: 26060

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: On behalf of Telereal Trillium Ltd

Telereal considers that increasing the density of the Bibb Way site to accommodate further house types and sizes will also contribute to IBC's affordable housing need. As IBC has only allocated the number units granted under prior approval, it is not contributing any affordable housing. By allocating the whole site (including Areas 2 and 3) for a larger number of homes can facilitate a contribution to affordable housing from this Site.

Object

Representation ID: 26141

Received: 13/03/2019

Respondent: Ipswich & East Suffolk Clinical Commissioning Group & West Suffolk CCG

Ipswich & East Suffolk CCG would like to raise the importance of creating essential NHS worker housing in the LP to help reduce workforce shortages in the locality.

The provision of assisted living developments and residential care homes, although a necessary feature of care provision and to be welcomed, can pose significant impacts on local primary care provision and it is important that planners and developers engage at a very early stage with the NHS, to plan and implement suitable mitigations.